HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mallya@octel.com (Satyanarayana Mallya)
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: Hijacking of democracy Re: S.R.I.A.
Date: 16 Nov 92 02:17:10 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Octel Communications Corporation

In article <101975@bu.edu> khalid@bu-bio.bu.edu (Rasheed A. Khalid) writes:
>I am apalled to read about what quite vividly appears to be
>a cheap conspiracy staged by non-Ahmadi Muslims on the net
>against Ahmadi Muslims.  An unauthorised person, Mr. Jaffery,
>posted the Call For Votes (CFV) for the proposed newsgroup
>soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya (moderated) even though he was
>never appointed to do so.  The mainstream Muslims (made up

	It is probably their intolerant nature that led to this chicanery.
However, it galls me that I and many netters mailed our response to that
unauthorized CFV. I think  CFV's should be authenticated in future by a
moderator so that netters can reply to the authentic one only. Anyway, I 
wish there was some kind of deterrant to such activity.

>	Given the nature of the competition, I would side with the
>group that has been wronged.  I will vote *YES* for the proposed
>newsgroup soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya (moderated).  I think every

	Just the thought that a particular group of people opposed to the
concept of a free and open discussion of a religion is reprehensible. I
think all netters who believe in free speech/secularism and hate the net
mullahs should definitely vote with a resouding YES. It is fortunate that this
media cannot be hijacked by a intolerant despot.

						-Satya Mallya   

************************************************************
Satya Mallya   
 ___    _____  ____  .                       
|   |__   |   |      |
|  ||     |   |----  |
|__||     |   |____  |____    
   |___
************************************************************
Xref: sparky news.groups:22446 news.admin.policy:485 rec.music.synth:18663 rec.music.makers.synth:231
From: dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy,rec.music.synth,rec.music.makers.synth
Subject: Re: A question, a comment
Date: 18 Nov 92 20:49:31 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Data Factory Services, Harrisburg, Pa.

In article <BxM0wA.5p9@cdsmn.mn.org>, plate@cdsmn.mn.org (Doug Plate) writes:
> As a matter of fact, someone (I can't remember who) DID post a message that
> said (to paraphrase): `There's a discussion going on in news.groups about
> changing the name of this group.  Look there if you care.'  I saw the message
> and that's why I went to news.groups and joined the discussion.  Maybe the
> person who posted that helpful pointer could come forward.

I think we'd ALL like to see that piece of mail. If it truly exists it
would deflate Daves last argument. Of course he'll probably argue that
the subject line of THAT message wasn't clear enough either. 

> Now I feel rather foolish that I've joined this discussion.

Don't feel foolish. That position os reserved for Dave.


-- 
 ...uunet!wa3wbu!frackit!dave -or-                       |  Dave Ratcliffe  |
 frackit!dave@uunet.UU.NET -or- dave@frackit.uucp -or-   |  Sys. <*> Admin. |
 vogon1!compnect!frackit!dave@psuvax1.psu.edu            | Harrisburg,  Pa. |
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: rec.music.makers.synth dispute solved
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
	<1992Nov19.093537.14856@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
	<1egohbINNv0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:05:04 GMT

In article <1egohbINNv0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak) writes:

	7) There is no way to differentiate the number of votes from
	   "participants" versus from "elitist" news.groups readers;

Actually, there /is/ such a way.  When I conducted the straw poll this
week, I asked who reads rec.music.synth.  The names of the respondents
may be compared to the names of the voters on the rename, to give some
idea of the ratio of readers to non-readers responding to the vote.

In the straw poll analysis, I offered to make the mailbox of responses
public (in the absence of an objection).  If, in a few days, no
objection is heard, I will forward the mailbox to anyone willing to
conduct this study.
-- 
Ed McGuire                   1603 LBJ Freeway, Suite 780
Systems Administrator/       Dallas, Texas 75234
 Member of Technical Staff   214/620-2100, FAX 214/484-8110
Intellection, Inc.           <ed@intellection.com>
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: qvortrup@inf.ethz.ch (Michael Qvortrup)
Subject: Re: rec.arts.fantasy
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 08:53:42 GMT

In article <By4zHL.FB4@newcastle.ac.uk> Chris.Holt@newcastle.ac.uk (Chris Holt) writes:
>Re whether r.a.f is feasible and/or desirable:
>
>I'm not convinced by the argument that the dividing line is too
>hard to draw and would produce too many flames.  There are many
>groups that overlap and have fuzzy borderlines, and they survive.
>Why can't
>        a. clearcut fantasy threads be on r.a.f
>        b. clearcut sf threads be on r.a.sf.*
>        c. borderline threads be cross-posted

Who determines what is a borderline case and what is a clearcut case?
I can see the difference, you can see the difference, but chances are
that we wont agree, and this is the real problem.

And why crosspost at all, if it isn't necessary?

>This is how (e.g.) comp.theory and sci.logic seem to work, and I haven't
>seen any real problems.  Or are f/sf advocates really that much more
>ornery and obnoxious than everyone else? :-)

Given the several flamewars and discussions on the topic, yes, I am 
afraid they are :-(.

Greetings,
--Mike

-- 
#include <std-disclm.h>--"... and there is a small flaw in my character."---
Real Life: Michael Christian Heide Qvortrup      A Dane         ETH, Zuerich
e-mail   : qvortrup@inf.ethz.ch                  abroad         Switzerland
Institut fuer wissenschaftliches Rechnen  /  Inst. of Scientific Computation
Via: uk.ac.leeds.scs; Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:29:59 +0000
Distribution: world
X-News-Gateway: NewsGateway@phaze.UUCP (NewsGateway 1.0 by Pierre Rioux)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 16:15:07 GMT
Newsgroups: news.groups
Organization: The University of Leeds, School of Computer Studies
From: ross-c@scs.leeds.ac.uk
To: usenet@phaze.cam.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored

In article <1992Nov19.030502.18694@bcrka451.bnr.ca> you write:
>In article <1992Nov18.184731.8504@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>>
>>And *again* I assert that it wasn't the fault of the unwillingly ignorant 
>>that they didn't vote.
>
>Dave, I often miss events or sales I'd be interested in, because I
>didn't bother reading the paper the day they were announced, or skipped
>over that section.  Would I be justified in complaining that I wasn't
>given fair notice, that I should get a second chance?

If it were your house that was being sold, too right you would be justified
in complaining. 

The equivilent situation would be if your local council issued a demolition
order on your house, and sent you a leaflet headed "Local power stations
to be demolised", and on page 4 it mentioned that your own house was to
be included.

Though, may I say that this argument has had more dodgy analogies than
any other I've seen on usenet.

Cheers,

Ross-c
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: news.groups
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 13:21:29 -0500 
From: "Andrew C. Plotkin" <ap1i+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy
	<1992Nov17.044736.9753@midway.uchicago.edu>

Excerpts from netnews.news.groups: 17-Nov-92 Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy
Dennis Brennan@ellis.uch (1064)

> Perhaps discussing the alleged "boundary" between fantasy
> and science fiction in hazy cases might be a good thread in r.a.fantasy
(as such discussions have been discouraged from r.a.sf.*)

Such discussions are not discouraged because they are off-subject.

They are discouraged because they never *go* anywhere. People yell
opinions at each other for a few weeks. Then it quiets down. Nothing
accomplished. Maybe someday a coherent discussion on the subject will
happen; if so, it would be welcomed in r.a.sf.*.

Excerpts from netnews.news.groups: 17-Nov-92 Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy
Jennifer E. Levine) (1108)

> There are people who like Fantasy and not Science fiction. They may
not realize they are welcome in rec.arts.sf.*

If they don't bother to look over the group, I have little sympathy. I
just scanned the subject lines of the last 50 messages in r.a.sf.written
at my site; 15 of them mentioned books or characters generally
classified as "fantasy". Plus there's a monthly introduction posted on
r.a.sf.announce and .misc. 

> I see the difficulty in defining the difference. I have my own definition.
> But I don't think that is the point.

???  If there is no agreed-on difference, how can there be a group split?

--Z

"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
Xref: sparky news.groups:22687 soc.culture.pakistan:17029 soc.culture.indian:37903 soc.culture.bangladesh:6163
From: majafri@cco.caltech.edu (Mansoor  A. Jafri)
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: The Moderator of SRI is PREJUDICE!
Date: 22 Nov 1992 11:26:26 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

In article <1992Nov21.002123.4377@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> rafiq@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (RAFIQ ANWAR) writes:
>

	Rafiq, yes the whole world is out to get you. There is a big 
	conspiracy, a really really big one! Happy now ?

	This rubbish about some grand plan on how people are so much
	against as to go out of their way to do something bad to you 
	is probably some bubble of ego. In reality, no one has that
	much time. Snap back into reality, please. 

	Lets look at the facts. 
		It was claimed, Soc.Religion.Islam doesn't allow to 
	post any messages or discuss any Ahamdi messages. Surprise, 
	surprise, there was a discussing going on. Even CFDs were
	being posted. The moderator decides they have enough messages
	posted from both sides and announces there will be no further
	redundant discussion. 

		Ah, what a wonderful opportunity, lets send a message
	and when it is not posted raise a hue and cry ? ;)
		
		Btw, contrary to your other conspiracy theory, I don't know 
	even know Balasat Ali Raja, nor did he ask me to post any CFV.
	I did it on my own and got a copy of it from guess where? 
	news.group [Rana's CFV which was not officially posted]

	Just curious, why are you so much against Soc.Religion.Islam
	and its moderator that you would jump on them for no reason at all ?

	btw, I don't think David Lawrence has any authority over any other
	moderators, including Basalat Ali Raja.

	Please focus the discussion on WHY the newsgrop is needed and not
	on What is a Ahmadi, their history, SRI or congratulatory remarks
	on each other.  A suggestion, of course.

	I am not revealing votes till the 'official CFV' and that vote
	has been counted. Contrary to yet another conspiracy theory  :)
	I am not contacting any voters to change their votes or 
 	revealing their names to anyone.

	Note, a group by the name of alt.sect.ahmadiyya already exists. 

>There was an article in soc.religion.islam by Mr. Saggaf,
>in which he had incited people to vote "no" for the 
>creation of the new proposed newsgroup: soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya.
>
>I tried to do a follow-up to the article, describing the unethical
>behaviour of Mr. Saggaf in that article. The follow-up article 
>was rejected by Mr. Balasat Ali Raja, moderator of
>soc.religion.islam, with a note saying that the discussion 
>about the new proposed group has ended. The rejected article
>is hereby included:


>>From gwydion@gnu.ai.mit.edu Wed Nov 18 17:19:54 1992
>>To: rafiq@rintintin.Colorado.EDU
>>Subject: Your article cannot be posted.
>>
>>All discussion on the new proposed newsgroup has
>>ended in soc.religion.islam, as my footnote to
>>the article you quoted said.  Therefore, I am 
>>not going to post your article.
>>
>>SIncerely,
>>Basalat Ali Raja.
From: shaw+@CS.CMU.EDU (Mary Shaw)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.boats.crew
Date: 17 Nov 92 20:07:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BxvMK9.7Cx.2
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University

In article <BxnGHu.FAK@uunet.uu.net> gumby@spock.uucp (Danny Richman) writes:
>     It seems by popular demand that a new newsgroup is needed:
>rec.boats.paddle has recently been flooded with complaints of new articles
>that deal generally with crew.  It appears that rowers do not get along
>too well with kayakers or rafters.
>     It would be in the best interest to start the creation of rec.boats.crew
>and begin the discussion from here on out.I hope that everyone will take part
>in this discussion which will soon lead into the deciding vote.  With 
>everyone's cooperation, we can make this transition as clean and smooth as 
>possible.
>-- 
>                                             gumby@choate.edu

He appears to believe that this serves as a call for discussion.  I certainly
don't agree, especially in the context of the discussion on r.b.p, which had
at the time a lot of grumbling about whether a new group was needed.  So I
don't believe that r.b.p has been adequately notified of this discussion.


In a subsequent article, gumby says
>(someone suggested rec.boats.oars, but remember even canoers and kayakers use
>oars.)

Canoists and kayakers do not use oars.  But it should be rec.boats.oar, by symmetry


If you take out the discussion about whether to split the groups, there hasn't
been enough crew traffic to be a problem, nor is there so much canoe/kayak
traffic to bother the crew crew.  There are lots of shared issues, esp re
training and river access.   I don't see any need to split the group.
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RENAME: Those against name change PLEASE READ!
Date: 16 Nov 1992 17:52:52 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Nov16.164650.20236@daimi.aau.dk> rorschak@daimi.aau.dk (Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
>dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>>Facts can be massaged to hide lots of bullshit. 
>Your postings are a fine example that you don't even need facts to hide
>lots of bullshit.

Would that he were hiding it, instead of spewing it around the world at a cost
of "hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars".
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
           "Cat: Four legs and an attitude." -- Jim Reese
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.usenet.culture
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Is news.groups cliquish? No way!
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:59:05 GMT

chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>I disagree strongly.  I can hardly think of a more egalitarian place
>of discussion.  Any and all newcomers are gladly (!!) welcomed in
>news.groups.  All they need bring are a clear style of expression and
>rational opinions to be expressed.

HA!! Yeah RIGHT. Define "clear style of expression" and "rational opinions".
Since those are very subjective measurements of textual prose, we are 
forced to conclude that this is the standar by which admittance into the
net.clique is granted.

Was this your intent?

>Of course, opinions are always open to dispute.  And anyone (!) who
>fails to demonstrate clarity and rationality is ridiculed mercilessly.

Yup, we can both agree on the ridicule part. But rationality is subjective.

>But that doesn't make news.groups cliquish.

Any subjective criterion for participation without ridicule is in fact
cliquish.

>free-for-all, and is therefore not for the timid.

But I thought voting and discussion were open to all? What about the timid?
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

	   What we see depends on mainly what we look for.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: RESULT correction: rec.arts.poems.urdu passes
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 02:58:07 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.235420.9908@ennews.eas.asu.edu> sridhar@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (Sridhar Venkataraman) writes:

   Most of the people who voted 'no' were in some sense 'namespace
   purists' and hardly any concern was given by the votetaker towards
   the suggestions given on news.groups regarding the name for the
   group. Not even a summary in the CFV of those
   suggestions/rebuttals.

Most, but not all.  In case you're curious, my vote against r.a.p.urdu
reflected a lack of any rationale for its creation in the CFV.  I
would have voted for r.a.p.urdu if it were demonstrated in the CFV
that the proposed topic was already active in an existing group and
had grown large enough to warrant its own group.
-- 
Ed McGuire                   1603 LBJ Freeway, Suite 780
Systems Administrator/       Dallas, Texas 75234
 Member of Technical Staff   214/620-2100, FAX 214/484-8110
Intellection, Inc.           <ed@intellection.com>
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 15 Nov 92 15:27:01 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Nov15.123808.11836@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>They don't care ABOUT what the admins want to name it...they just want their
>group intact. Usually this means that they DON'T want their name changed.

Those two are only connected in your mind and the minds of those who are
disrupting the group by refusing to accept the vote.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
     We survived Jimmy Carter; we'll (probably) survive Bill Clinton.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Would you ALL like a demonstration? (was Re: Dave Hayes may be right)
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff & Nonsense Division
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 05:42:12 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.004656.17483@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:

>twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>
>>>Really? If I posted that "people in news.groups feel that if you see
>>>a message of this form...that you should read it or risk losing your 
>>>group name", that's deception?
>>
>>Yes.  About on the same level as pulling a malicious fire alarm.
>
>I dunno. No one would be hurt or killed in the stampede. 

(a) The context of the net, Dave.  For God's sake.  Keep it in
context.

(b) The issue was deception.  The act you propose is one of willful
deception, designed solely to send people into a screaming panic.
Like pulling a fire alarm as a prank.

(c) WRT stampeding, I have endured nearly a hundred malicious or
malfunctioning fire alarms in the last four and a half years at
Amherst.  That's not an exaggeration.  I'm not aware of anyone who's
been trampled.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: pmf$1349@altair.selu.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re:  CFV ahmadiyya
Date: 18 Nov 92 15:02:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: altair.1992Nov18.210254.1090
Organization: Southeastern Louisiana University

In article <102313@bu.edu>, khalid@bu-bio.bu.edu (Rasheed A. Khalid) wrote:

> This expression: Seal of the prophets, has been taken by these Mullahs to
> mean last of the prophets, which it does not mean.  An idea of this can
> be had from the fact that the word "Khatam" (seal) has often been used in
> arabic literature to mean perfect in every sense, and the greatest of all,
> but not the last, of all:
 
Shakil answered:

>Is this meant to be a joke?  Do you really know Arabic?  The primary
>meaning of the word "khatam" is "seal" as in to "seal a process" or
>"close," i.e. "end."  If you would care to look through the Qur'an,
>you will find this is consistent.  Finding some metaphorical uses of
>the word in bizarre contexts where it means "ring" or "to show
>greatness" is as ridiculous as interpreting "seal" to mean the literal
>wax emblem used on letters in this context.  How come it didn't occur
>to millions of Muslims for hundreds of years that "Khatamun-Nabiyyeen"
>could mean some of the things you suggest?  There was no doubt in
>*anyone's* mind what the Arabic word meant in this context.  Any
>native speaker of Arabic will tell you the primary meaning of the
>word, namely "last", "finish", or "complete."

In support of Shakil's argument it may help to add that the correct
word used in the Holy Quran is KHATIM unnabyin which means the complete
and finish (i.e. no other naby after).  KHATAM (which means ring) is not 
the word used, thus the KHATAM argument is false.  Therefore, prophet 
Muhammad was the finish of the nabiyyin according to the Holy Quran and 
there is no nabi after him.

Then Khaled wrote:
> The question is: if Khatam in arabic has continually been used for greatness
> rather than being at the end of a process, 

See the above paragraph.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Rami Hijazi
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: nsw@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Neil Weinstock)
Subject: Re: Short comments, plus long rec.music.makers.* pre-vote discussion
Organization: The Flying Squid Patrol
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 00:47:32 GMT
Keywords: music, makers, synth, flame war, vote, rfd, cfv

Hoo boy.  Y'know, I think there are a lot of valid points to be had by both
sides in this argument, but this is just too much.

Dave Hayes wrote:
>arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>>Another point to note: if nobody even _realized_ that an article was posted
>>with the word "rename" in the header until _now_, that means the article was
>>fairly inconspicuous....
>
>Yes. Just because you post one article (heard of KILL files? Bad news spools?)
>doesn't mean everyone heard it.

First, in response to Ken's comment, define "inconspicuous."  The title of
the article was explicit.  It lacked A LOT OF CAPITAL LETTERS, but you're
not gonna convince me that should have been required.

Second, in response to Dave, I dare say that my article was killed by a
statistically insignificant number of kill files, perhaps even 0.  Feel free
to offer evidence to the contrary.  As for bad news spools, that is possible,
but pure speculation, and really stretching it.  Gimme a break.

In other words, in absence to evidence to the contrary, I assert that my
article was widely distributed and simply ignored by most folks.

Dave wrote again:
In article <1992Nov20.235303.18343@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>>If there was really such a groundswell of opinion against the rename, why
>>wasn't there a bunch of discussion generated by that article??
>
>It takes more than that. Look at how I started this flamewar. I posted
>many articles within a span of time. THAT got a response. 

So?  I was not trying to start a flamewar, nor should I have been.  You
previously complained that no one was notified in an unambiguous way; that
has now been proved false (thanks to Rich for his meticulous record-keeping).
Now you are apparently escalating your requirements; it is becoming harder and
harder to take this whole thread seriously (if it was ever easy).

                                - Neil

--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--
Neil Weinstock @ AT&T Bell Labs         //     What was sliced bread
att!edsel!nsw or nsw@garage.att.com   \X/    the greatest thing since?