HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eric@igs.com (Eric Janik)
Subject: Colorado Ski Report
Organization: IGS, Inc.
Distribution: co
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 19:39:25 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.051127.8256@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> news@ucsu.Colorado.EDU
(Frank Crary) writes:

 Since you think your life is so easy compared to someone who isn't
 white, male and straight, you seem to think it would be much
 harder if you were not. While you would certainly have more problems,
 why do you think they would be so substantial (i.e. significantly
 worse than any other problems you might have)? 

My point was that many people would benefit society and themselves if they
would (a) be more grateful for any advantages they have, (b) try to under-
stand life without some of those advantages, and (c) not pick a fight just
because they think they can win.

I'm sorry if I came across as accusing all supporters of Amendment 2 as
homophobes or bigots.  I was reacting to some extremely childish and selfish
views that were being expressed.  If the shoe doesn't appear to fit, don't
feel compelled to put it on.

My appeal was for compassion and empathy, something even supporters of
Amendment 2 should understand.

To clarify my leanings, I have more empathy for an employee who feels unjustly
fired than for the employer who did it without using due process and doc-
umenting the reasons for his actions.  Cause and due process are a judgement
call; most would agree that non-disruptive sexual behavior outside of the
workplace is not cause, and that unsatisfactory performance or inappropriate
behavior in the workplace would require more process than illegal or
destructive behavior at work.  Conversely, I would take the side of the
employer who justifies his position.  This would probably not diminish the
compassion I would feel for the justly terminated employee, who should
probably do everyone a favor and get some help.

In the absence of special employment agreements, an employer who can't find
cause but wants to get rid of somebody anyway can always call it a downsizing
and let the employee collect unemployment insurance.


Eric Janik
Lyons, Colorado
Newsgroups: co.general
From: woods@claven.ucar.edu (Greg Woods)
Subject: Re: Emissions Inspections, is new really be
Organization: Scientific Computing Division/NCAR Boulder, CO
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 17:52:43 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.231914.11500@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
>Why not wait until we know if there is a problem, before we try to
>solve it?

There are a whole BOATLOAD of problems. To name a few: pollution, 
inattentive drivers, drunk drivers, sleepy drivers, incompetent
drivers, congestion, inefficient use of energy and resulting environmental
damage, ......

--Greg
From: kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski)
Newsgroups: co.general
Subject: Re: Emissions Inspections, is new really be
Date: 28 Jan 1993 16:55:13 -0700
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc., Longmont, CO
NNTP-Posting-Host: anthrax-fddi.solbourne.com

While reading article <1993Jan28.162731.14311@ncar.ucar.edu>, I noticed that
chris@chinook.atd.ucar.edu said the following:
>kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski) writes:
>>Then that's your standard, you're free to choose.  If I drive into downtown
>>Denver (e.g. Continental, United Artists) to see a movie because I'm not going
>>to spend $6.00 to see a film at the ShoeBox 6, that's mine.
>
>I realize this is a matter of opinion, but you actually consider
>spending an hour in a car, just to sit in a nicer theatre for 2
>hours a higher standard of living?

A higher standard of living?  Perhaps not, but then again there are no decent
movie theatres in Boulder.  The point is, if I'm going to spend $6.00 to see
a movie, I'd rather drive an hour and have a good experience than see the film
on a screen smaller than that of the largest large-screen TV at SoundTrack and
with sound worthy of an AM radio.

>This gets back to my initial statement.  Cheap gas has led to
>a poor layout of infrastructure (movie theatres, markets).  And
>the poor layout forces (forces is stronger than I want, but I
>can't come up with a better word) you to rely on your car. 
>If gas cost more, people would complain, and maybe someone would
>build a better theatre in Boulder.

Would these be the same people who think that VHS is an acceptable video
format and that an acceptable quality audio system can be found at Fred Schmid?
Unfortunately, most people seem to be sheep and will accept what is available
and convenient rather than what is the "best" when it comes to the quality of
a film viewing experience.  I see no lack of people willing to see films at
either the Mann or AMC theatres in Boulder, rather than avoiding them for a
"real" theatre (like a theatre with a THX system).

I also believe your argument to be a bit specious, as there has always been a,
to use your phrase "poor layout of infrastructure" since before the automobile.
If you're living in 1800's Colorado and want to see a symphony or opera, no
amount of begging or complaining will get you a concert hall in Niwot; you're
still going to have to find a way into Denver.
-- 
| William Kucharski, Solbourne Computer, Inc.     | Opinions expressed herein
| Internet: kucharsk@solbourne.com   Ham: N0OKQ   | are MINE alone, NOT those
| Snail Mail: 1900 Pike Road, Longmont, CO  80501 | of Solbourne Computer, Inc.
| President, "Just the Ten of Us" Fan Club        | "Dittos from Longmont, CO"
Newsgroups: co.general
From: worobec@spot.Colorado.EDU (WOROBEC MICHAEL)
Subject: sale
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:04:34 GMT


                  FOR SALE:


        Trek 420 touring, ridden less than 100 miles, 
                          all accessories, $300

        Yamaha twin-12 100-watt musical instrument amp, $150.
        
        Bauer Inline Skates, brand-new condition, size 10, $90.
    
        Sony portable telephone, $45.

        Snow tires (4) 155-12's, studded, only 2K miles, $140.

	Sigma (Martin) acoustic guitar, well-seasoned, mellow, 
                       great action, perfect condition, hard case $200.


        Contact: Mike Worobec 303-545-9688 (Boulder)


        
Newsgroups: co.general
From: crosby@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Matthew Crosby)
Subject: Re: Emissions Inspections, is new really be
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: co
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 03:42:26 GMT

In article <1jkb1jINN7vn@anthrax.solbourne.com> kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski) writes:
>While reading article <1993Jan19.152719.4379@ncar.ucar.edu>, I noticed that
>chris@chinook.atd.ucar.edu said the following:
> >At some point the U.S. is going to need to make a shift away from cheap gas.
>
>Why?  Just because European countries like to impose heinous taxes on their
>citizens doesn't mean the U.S. has to.  Higher gas taxes for increased
>spending?  How about lower spending?  Now there's an idea...
>
I saw a breakdown of world gas prices in the Economist a couple of weeks ago.
Apparently, percentage wise, the rest of the world doesn't charge that much
more in taxes, rather the raw prices are quite a bit dearer.

Anyway, the point is that when you go out in your car, you are very heavily
subsidised--you are driving on extremely expensive roads and putting out ton's
of pollution, and not paying the cost.

-- 
-Matt
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the net!
mcrosby@nyx.cs.du.edu    -or-    crosby@cs.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: co.general
From: kauff@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Brian Kauffman)
Subject: Re: Colorado amendment 2 information / boycott
Organization: NCAR, Boulder CO
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:43:47 GMT

> = terryg@stortek.com (Terry Gottehrer x4943) writes:
>: = jmatthews@uswest.com wrote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>: My sister and her partner were leaving a Denver bar on Friday night, 
>: and three men screamed "Fuckin' Dykes" and threw beer bottles at them 
>: from a passing car.  Now, you tell me how this could happen, since 
>: there is no hate in the state of Colorado, Mr. LeSatz.

> Before Amendment 2 passed, nobody was labeling Colorado a hate state. Nobody
> posted here that Colorado was full of hate. Honestly, can anyone say there
> is a correlation between Amendment 2 passing and this unfortunate incident
> involving Jaye's sister? I don't see one. Does anyone really believe that
> this incident would not have occured had Amendment 2 not passed?

Does anyone really believe that the passage of A2 does not in any way
encourage this type of behavior to some extent?

Obviously this single anecdote doesn't establish anything.  On the other hand,
it's not only plausible, but reasonable, to speculate that the passage of 
amendment 2 will encourage certain hateful people to become more open in 
their hatred -- particularly in the context of the attitude expressed by 
the more candid comments of the amendment's sponsors.

Also, I find the "before amendment 2 passed, nobody was labeling Colorado a 
hate state" both true and interesting.  I suspect many other "states" have 
some unsavory attitudes that have not yet been brought to the national 
attention.  Can you say "glass houses"?  Sure.  I knew that you could.

-Brian
Newsgroups: co.general
From: freedman@cs.colostate.edu (keith freedman)
Subject: Re: Emissions Inspections, is new really be
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:04:07 GMT
Reply-To: freedman@cs.colostate.edu
Organization: Colorado State University -=- Computer Science Department

In article 14684@ucsu.Colorado.EDU, fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
>In article <Jan20.190138.72275@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> freedman@cs.colostate.edu writes:
>>Increasing the gas tax would provide extra funds for the government
>>to put into alternative energy research, newer, more economical and
>>environmentally friendly mass transit systems, etc....
>
>The federal government already spends a great deal too much 
>money, and has a pathetic record of spending money poorly and
>on worthless things. Once we send all this money to Washington,
>why do you think it won't just be wasted? If an organization
>has a history of wastefull spending and debt, I don't think
>giving them even _more_ money in the hopes that they will 
>suddenly change their ways is a good idea.
>
Remember, quite a bit of this money they're wasting is going to
subsidise our driving habbits.  (i.e. oil industry, roads, war,
etc....)
Perhaps we should all write our congresspersons and tell
them that if they raise the gas tax, the proceeds must be earmarked
for something they currently don't spend money on (that way they
don't just use creative bookkeeping to divert other money...)

---
Keith Freedman
Colorado State University
Department of Computer Science
Systems Administration

Newsgroups: co.general
From: jkl@fsl.noaa.gov (Jennifer Longstaff)
Subject: Re: Phone numbers?
Organization: Forecast Systems Lab, NOAA - Boulder CO, USA
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: co
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:22:00 GMT

(smithrud@advtech.uswest.com) wrote:
: millerje@CS.ColoState.EDU (Jeff Miller) writes:
: >When I purchase something on my VISA card and they (sometimes) ask for my
: >phone number....
: >Now I've seen many stores asking me for my phone number when I buy something
: >with a check....
: >My question is:  Are you under any obligation to give a phone number for a
: >check purchase?
: 
: I have never read or heard that a person is obligated to give out their
: phone number when making store purchases with a credit card or a
: personal check....
: They ask to see a major credit card, a driver's license and/or a check
: guarantee card.  I don't think they need my home phone number on top
: of all that.

I've quit putting my phone number on any purchases since an incident about
6 years ago.  I bought something at a Radio Shack, and during the sale and
the purchase I was being helped by a particular salesman.  I VISA'd the 
purchase and put down my home phone number when asked.  Well a week later,
that salesman called me at home and asked me out.  Since I have an unlisted
phone number, he obviously had just copied down my phone number off my VISA
receipt.  In this case, my phone number wasn't being used to verify my
credit, or for anything related to my paying for my purchase.  

I was a little irritated by this invasion of privacy, but after thinking
about it, I thought: what if that salesman had been a weird obscene phone
caller instead of just a guy trying to get a date?  (I also thought that
if the salesman were planning on calling me he should have asked me if he
could have my number rather than just copying it down without permission.)
This made me more worried about casually giving out my phone number anywhere.

Now I don't have it pre-printed on my checks (I used to) and I just ignore
the phone number request on VISA bills.  If people insist, I put down my
husband's work phone number.  I hope this doesn't sound too paranoid, because
it's mainly the principle of "Do they really NEED this phone number?"

Newsgroups: co.general
From: chuck@sage.cgd.ucar.edu (Chuck D'Ambra)
Subject: hardwood floor installers
Followup-To: poster
Keywords: thanks!
Reply-To: chuck@sage.cgd.ucar.edu
Organization: National Center for Atmospheric Research
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 23:13:45 GMT

Thanks for all the recommendations on hardwood floor installers.  There were
so many responses, in fact, that I was unable to respond personally to
everyone or to contact all the installers who were recommended.  We are
going with Rosewood Hardwood Flooring.  It should be done in a week or so,
and if anyone is interested, I'd be happy to report the results.

--------------------
Chuck D'Ambra
chuck@sage.cgd.ucar.edu
Newsgroups: co.general
From: ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu (Edward J. Hartnett)
Subject: Re: Amnd.2 Boycott is Counterproductive.
Organization: CIRES, University of Colorado
Distribution: co
Date: 21 Jan 93 09:53:17

In article <1993Jan21.060045.16768@colorado.edu> kooros@refuge.Colorado.EDU (Paul T. Kooros) writes:

	   IMHO, Coloradans seeking to advance the "Boycott Colorado" movement
   are misguided.  They are contributing to a self-destructive anti-productive
   movement which itself practices discrimination, targets for vengeance
   harmless groups, and fails to target culprit groups.  The movement's focus
   is on the collective punishment of "Colorado" (a practice forbidden governments
   by the Geneva and Hague conventions), and offers joining individuals the
   self-indulgent relief of their consciences.  This, rather than address
   rectifying the situation.  Let me explain myself:
			<snip>
	   I can only imagine that people joining "Boycott Colorado" do so
   primarily for the pacification of their consciences.  I suggest that
   practicing political correctness for the purpose of feeling good is
   a gross hypocrisy.  Instead of self-indulgently venting your anger at 
   society, I suggest that you undertake the battle for the hearts and minds
   of Coloradans.  Have you ever talked to a farmer or rancher about Amnd. 2?
   I thought not.

I think you're missing the real target of the boycott, which is not
Colorado, but every other state. Since something like 12 states now
have organizations working for something like A2, it seems to me quite
possible that a perceived economic hardship in Colorado because of A2
will influence the voters and politicians of other states.  The smart
politicians and businessmen will come out against their local version,
claiming that economic hardship will follow.

While I agree that the boycott against Colorado will be unlikely to
have short term effects in this state, it's not inconceivable to me
that it would have the effect over the course of the next couple of
years of swinging Colorado against A2. Only a small percentage of the
population need be convinced to change their vote for another
amendment to repeal it.

And finally, why should any gay-rights activist care about the
individual people of Colorado? Do you care that the boycott of South
America probably hurt plenty of people who never discriminated against
blacks, or were working for their benifit? There's bound to be innocent
victims in any boycott, but that doesn't mean that boycotts shouldn't
be used.

Not that I support the boycott of Colorado; I just think it's naive to
say it won't have any good effects for gay-rights activists. They now
have a visible opponent and a cause to rally around. Obviously they
hope that when all is said and done this battle will be won in every
state, by convincing the country that passing A2-like laws is a bad
idea and causes lots of trouble and problems for the state. From their
point of view a boycott against Colorado is proabably a good stratigic
move. 


--
	Don't blame me, I voted against Amendment 2!

Edward Hartnett				ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu

Newsgroups: co.general
From: freedman@cs.colostate.edu (keith freedman)
Subject: Re: Phone numbers?
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 23:21:13 GMT
Reply-To: freedman@cs.colostate.edu
Organization: Colorado State University -=- Computer Science Department

In article 23936@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU, millerje@CS.ColoState.EDU (Jeff Miller) writes:
>Now I've seen many stores asking me for my phone number when I buy something
>with a check.  I show my driver's license when they ask for it, and I've been
>giving my phone number, as not to make a big deal, but I'd rather not.
>
>My question is:  Are you under any obligation to give a phone number for a
>check purchase?  Do companies use this phone number (on your check) in the same
>way they do on credit cards.
>
You are under as much obligation to give your phone number as the company
is to take your check!!
Most companies ask for phone numbers on checks so that if the check bounces,
they can contact you.  Of course, if the check is going to bounce, the
phone might as well be disconnected?!

---
Keith Freedman
Colorado State University
Department of Computer Science
Systems Administration
From: rael@col.hp.com (Mike Rael)
Newsgroups: co.ads,co.general
Subject: House For Sale
Date: 26 Jan 1993 01:02:43 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division
Distribution: co
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpcslb11.col.hp.com

Four bedroom, two bath house for sale in Colorado Springs.

Detached two-car garage with garage door opener
Sprinkler systems in front and back yards
Single-level with finished basement
Approx. 1600 square feet total (includes basement)
New roof
Oak cabinets in kitchen
All appliances stay with house
$69,500 or $3,000 to assume 9.5% loan ($619.34 PITI)

Please contact me via e-mail
Mike Rael
rael@col.hp.com
Newsgroups: co.general
From: freedman@cs.colostate.edu (keith freedman)
Subject: Re: Emissions Inspections, is new really be
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 22:28:32 GMT
Reply-To: freedman@cs.colostate.edu
Organization: Colorado State University -=- Computer Science Department

In article 1k1e77INNlni@anthrax.solbourne.com, kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski) writes:
>While reading article <Jan22.185847.33362@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>, I noticed that
>freedman@cs.colostate.edu said the following:
> >you seem unconcerned about the environmental toll here.  Anyways, if
> >supply dwindles, we'll just tear up the alaskan wildlife refuge to get
> >the oil out of there.  We'll dig up the rest of the rocky mountains
> >to scrape all the coal out of there.  We'll increase off shore drilling
> >and pour more toxic cruid oil into the ocean (increasing the price
> >of fresh seafood, too).
>
>I don't believe this will happen.  This seems to be the same "scare tactic"
>used by anti-Amendment 1 folks
a mojority of former president bush's energy plan was to allow drillin
in the Alaskan wildlife refuge and push coal smeltering in north western
Colorado and north eastern Utah in order to "be less dependant on foreigh
sources".  This will destroy some thus-far-untouched real estate that animals
are currently enjoying.  Then, when that's gone, we have an even greater
problem with dependance on foreign sources.  He didn't much mention research
in renewable sources. (cause all his friends are in the oil biz.)
We'll have to see what Clinton comes up with.
>
> >Secondly, the oil companies will not try to
> >produce alternative energy at today's gas prices, they'll charge only
> >slightly less (or even more) than what oil will cost THEN because people
> >will become accustom to paying high prices for energy and the energy
> >companies will just capitalize on that.
>
>If people are willing to pay it.  It's called a "market economy."  If people
>are willing and want to pay $3.00/gallon for their fuel of choice, charge 
>$3.00/gallon.  If people would buy more at $1.00/gallon and you still make a
>nice profit, the "oil" companies will charge $1.00/gallon.
> 
If the government let the market determine oil prices, they would be comprable
to european prices (i.e. $3 - $5/ gallon).  If they aren't going to let the
market achieve those prices, they should achieve them through taxes. 
---
Keith Freedman
Colorado State University
Department of Computer Science
Systems Administration
From: kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski)
Newsgroups: co.general
Subject: Re: Emissions Inspections, is new really be
Date: 27 Jan 1993 19:05:47 -0700
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc., Longmont, CO
NNTP-Posting-Host: anthrax-fddi.solbourne.com

While reading article <Jan27.222832.73565@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>, I noticed that
freedman@cs.colostate.edu said the following:
 >a mojority of former president bush's energy plan was to allow drillin
 >in the Alaskan wildlife refuge and push coal smeltering in north western
 >Colorado and north eastern Utah in order to "be less dependant on foreigh
 >sources".  This will destroy some thus-far-untouched real estate that animals
 >are currently enjoying.  Then, when that's gone, we have an even greater
 >problem with dependance on foreign sources.  He didn't much mention research
 >in renewable sources. (cause all his friends are in the oil biz.)
 >We'll have to see what Clinton comes up with.

Oil drilling does not necessarily "destroy" the environment "the animals are
currently enjoying."  Oil can indeed be removed from the ground in an
environmentally sensitive manner.  The same is true for mining.

 >If the government let the market determine oil prices, they would be comprable
 >to european prices (i.e. $3 - $5/ gallon).  If they aren't going to let the
 >market achieve those prices, they should achieve them through taxes. 

No, if the government let the market determine oil prices it would be about
$.60/gallon (given $1.20/gallon minus the approximately sixty cents per gallon
in taxes imposed at the state and federal levels).  The main reason gas is
$3.00 - $5.00 gallon in foreign countries is that for various reasons gas is
very heavily taxed in Europe.
-- 
| William Kucharski, Solbourne Computer, Inc.     | Opinions expressed herein
| Internet: kucharsk@solbourne.com   Ham: N0OKQ   | are MINE alone, NOT those
| Snail Mail: 1900 Pike Road, Longmont, CO  80501 | of Solbourne Computer, Inc.
| President, "Just the Ten of Us" Fan Club        | "Dittos from Longmont, CO"
Newsgroups: co.general
From: cvacura@uswat.uswest.com (V)
Subject:  Colorado Rockies Season Tickets?
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Distribution: co
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:54:02 GMT

Is anyone interested in sharing a pair of Rockies season tickets?
I would like to split a pair of season tickets 4 ways which would
be 20 games per share.  The share owners would hold a draft of
sorts to choose their games.  I think you can get a semi decent pair
of tickets for $1000-1200.  That's $250-$300 a share.

Any takers?

Call me at 541-6376.

Craig
Newsgroups: co.general