HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 18:30:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.044736.9753@midway.uchicago.edu> djb6@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>I believe one of the charters in the sf.* hierarchy points out the
>definition of Science Fiction as "whatever I point at when I say
>'science fiction'".
>
>Why strive for a hair-splitting definitive division between "science
>fiction" and "fantasy"?  In general, a user looking at these groups
>will have a fairly good idea what genre of fiction is expected in the
>group.  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.*)

One of the predictable results of rec.arts.fantasy would be flame-wars
protesting that something isn't fantasy and it should be removed from
this group. Considering that a number of popular authors and series 
cross the line between fantasy and science fiction repeatedly, keeping
everything in one group makes sense. The canonical example is Anne
McCaffrey's Pern series. The early books have all the hallmarks of fantasy,
but the later books are a mix. In particular, _Dragonsdawn_ is clearly
science fiction, but it's all part of the same series. So where does
one discuss it?

Usenet readers have a tendency to be anal-retentive. They shouldn't
be encouraged in it.
-- 
Stephen Graham
graham@cs.washington.edu	 uw-beaver!june!graham
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.miscn
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Usenet Culture, Part 2
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 02:25:49 GMT

jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) writes:
>If you feel the need to continue this subject ... take a free clue.

Your article was exactly what he was talking about. Be nice or be ignored.
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

    If it works...use it. If it doesn't, find out why and use THAT.
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Dave Hayes may be right (was Re: To keep the r.m.s rename...)
Date: 18 Nov 92 01:56:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: talon.1ec7s7INNn17
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: skyking.oce.orst.edu

In article <1992Nov13.150515.15138@cubic.com> hees@cubic.com (Phil Hees) writes:
>Hmm... you seem to be making one of Dave's points for him: that 84,000
>random "news.groupies" can opt to vote on any aspect of the renaming,
>reorganization, or REMOVAL of a news group which they have never read or
>participated in.

That's right. So what?

>For analogy, I would be pretty concerned if people in Brazil (pop.
>118,674,000) could vote on issues directly affecting Dix Hills, NY (pop.
>34,000).

USENET is a worldwide network. Read that again. Rec.music.synth is
carried in Brazil. They have a right to vote on it.

OTH, ny.misc is probably NOT carried in Brazil, and they certainly
didn't vote on it.

>Similarly, if a CFV to rmgroup <insert your favorite newsgroup here>
>passes, then *POOF!* <your favorite newsgroup> disappears in a cloud of
>orange smoke.  

Yep. 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: news.groups: theory and practice
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:12:37 GMT
Organization: Usenet Power Elite: Crush-The-Innocent-Newbies Strike Team

gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:

>> You're either "trying to hide the discussion" or "polluting the
>> newsgroup with messages that have nothing to do with its main topic,"
>> and either way, you're gonna get flamed.  
>
> But in the second case you are allowing more people to contribute to the
> [discussion]. 

That's useful only to a degree.  If there is a little discussion, yes, you
are getting a broader base of input for the discussion . . . but "having a
little discussion" on the net can be a lot like "being a little pregnant".
Discussion of particularly divisive proposal can completely overwhelm an
otherwise-perfectly-healthy newsgroup, and in the case of
rec.music.makers.synth, I can just about guarantee you that had the
discussion had taken place on r.m.s, that gateway to SYNTH-L would have
been shut down for good a month sooner.

Problems like that are why *all* discussion is supposed to take place here
in news.groups.  Better pointers to discussions and votes (with followups
set here) are valuable, but it's a Very Bad Thing (IMO) to actually hold
the discussions in the groups that are being affected.   

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)

captain Kirk is getting fatter and fatter -when will he pop
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: qvortrup@inf.ethz.ch (Michael Qvortrup)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy
Keywords: fantasy RFD arts
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 08:46:13 GMT

In article <642@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>[...]
>rec.arts.f&sf might be nice (except for the invalid character :)
>
>	...f-sf...?  

I could live with that. It seems to be better than spec-fic.

>f/sf and f&sf are frequently used in bookstores for the "fantasy and 
>science fiction" amalgam.  I think if some sort of legible variant
>of that could be used more people would find it than some obscure
>abbreviation of "speculative fiction" which is way too highbrow for
>some of us pulp fans :)

There is good reason in using the same kind of identifier used in the
typical bookshop. And we don't want to be elitist snobs, right? :-)

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
From: roder@cco.caltech.edu (Brenda J. Roder)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.adoption
Date: 20 Nov 1992 19:57:19 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu
Keywords: adoption

ivory@e7sa.crd.ge.com (John Ivory) writes:


>* There's already an e-mail group for adoption, and many felt that that
>should suffice. I joined that group for a while and was basically disappointed.
>The dialogs were mostly monologues.  The bulk of the traffic dealt with
>people who had already completed the adoption process.  Each would chronicle
>their ordeal, but there would be very little flow beyond that.  There
>were a lot of nice people on there, but very little extended interaction.
>The group was small in number (~25 or so?), but that could be due to
>lack of knowledge of its existance.

Do you have cause to believe that the group dynaamics (interaction) would
be significantly different in a newsgroup than a mailing list?  I am  neither
for nor against this group, but wonder if perhaps there is some reason that
it just doesn't lend itself to the kind of interaction amenable to net usage.
Perhaps you could try to advertise the mailing list more heavily and see if
it became more interesting and then it would be a jumping off point for
a mainstream group.

-- 
-- Brenda (roder@cobalt.caltech.edu)
Thought before action, if there's time.
    _The Edge_  Dick Francis
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: Intentional ignorance of newsgroup creation
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:06:13 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee):
>In article <2B091165.5732@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>I am not prepared to believe that it is even possible to achieve, much
>>less desireable to strive for, documents with no "extraneous information".
>
>Arguing that you can't get rid of something completely is not a sensible
>response to someone who merely wishes to reduce it.

But I see no indication that Gordon wishes merely to reduce it.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
                 just another elitist Usenet administrator
Xref: sparky news.groups:21876 talk.bizarre:38176
Newsgroups: news.groups,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: CFV? What's a CFV??
From: rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec)
Date: 15 Nov 92 12:17:01 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: GSP Whitewater Slalom Racing Team

In article <6976@ac13.cs.nps.navy.mil> rpwhite@ac13.cs.nps.navy.mil (rpwhite) writes:
>rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) writes:
>
>>By and large, they were roundly ignored.
>
>Uh oh, I think we have a new catchphrase on our hands.

Thank you (takes bow to thunderous applause, ducks rotten tomatoes). :-)

Part of the reason I wrote the bit from which this is excerpted stems
from frustration: I've contributed to a number of the n.a.newusers
documents, and even wrote one.  (I created the List of Periodic Postings
in 1989, and maintained it until last year, when I turned it over
to Jonathan Kamens, who has really done a terrific job with it.)
Despite a massive investment in time and effort on my part, and his
part, and on the part of all the people who wrote the FAQ's and
other documents listed in it, I haven't seen much evidence that new
users actually read these things before posting to Usenet.

---Rsk
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: news.groups,misc.jobs.misc
Subject: Re: RFD- misc.jobs.non-computer
Date: 20 Nov 92 17:06:44 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1992Nov18.203015.8004@leland.Stanford.EDU>, igj@leland.Stanford.EDU (Ian Glen Jacobs) writes:
> 
> =>I think there should be a group (I know it would have light traffic)
> =>called something like misc.jobs.offered.noncomputer.
> =>
> =>There are so few non-computer jobs listed that this new group would make
> =>it easier for non-computer job searchers to find what they are looking
> =>for. It might also increase the frequency of such posts...
> =>
> =>
> =>any responses
> ps- since I have first posted this I have recieved about ten messages... 9 
>in favor and one strongly pooh-poohing me, saying that I should use the 
>"proper" arena for a job search.

	Heh.

	The problem with any split is that the group was just split a few
months ago, and to prevent rules goblins from stampeding any changes, further
RFDs should be done after Jan 1st.                                  

Brett
===============================================================================
80s: 18 million new jobs, deficits down (%GNP), tax rates down, tax revenues up
GNP up, inflation down, unemployment down, interest rates down, cold war won
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: juntunen@nevada.edu (JEANNETTE JUNTUNEN)
Subject: Rodeo??
Originator: juntunen@helios.nevada.edu
Organization: University of Nevada System Computing Services
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 20:24:13 GMT


Hi! Hope this is the place to ask! I haven't seen a news group which may 
discuss the rodeos. Did I just overlook one? 

Could you please email me.

Thanks,
Jeannette
----
juntunen@nevada.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 03:54:15 GMT

jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders) writes:
>>No, it isn't. But to justify ostracization from a vote because of that
>>frustration isn't exactly fair. 
>	And to demand that the rights of people who can't even be bothered
>to inform themselves of how the network they're using are being violated
>isn't. "Help, help, I'm being oppressed"

(Again I repeat myself) It's not like they had an option of whether or
not to be bothered. You are lumping those who are ignorant of their
ignorance (the unwillingly ignorant) into the same class as those who
are willingly ignorant. 

They ARE being oppressed. Especially if they would have gotten involved,
had they known.

>	Which attempt? The attempt to communicate something complicated in a
>way even the greenest newbie can understand. If you're talking about the
>guidelines, as written, they did a fairly good job for me. As the only
>other poster supporting you with any volume in this thread obviously
>hasn't read them, it's hard to tell in his case.

Given the actual percentage of people who read news.groups as people who
read the rest of the net...I'd say that they were unclear to 80% of the
people out there. (I'm ballparking, but you can go and see the latest
arbitron report to verify)

>	Now you're contradicting yourself again. First Jay and his cabal are
>oppressing the "little guy" on Usenet by requiring that they have a
>clue, now you're claining that he'd oppose requiring clues. 

Makes sense to me. 8)

>>On USENET we learn to filter out unwanted or unneeded information. So
>>if you ask: "What standard does the first time user use to determine need?"
>>you can't possibly get anything remotely looking like those Guidelines. 
>	It's funny then how well they have worked for those who have taken the
>time to read them. 

But those aren't a good sample. Those people are used to ferreting out 
data from obscure documentation. How many people have read them and had
them NOT work for them? You don't know that one...do you?
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Test  (n.)   - 1. A hardship you don't expect.
Brave (adj.) - 1. Someone looking for a test.
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Monday, 16 Nov 1992 21:08:45 EST
From: Solipsist at Large <IK20001@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy

Rec.arts.fantasy sounds like a good idea, but what makes it different
from sf.misc?  Is it just the label of `SF' that bothers?  What defines
Fantasy?  Is Science Fantasy or Space Opera SF or Fantasy?  How about
Piers Anthony's Apprentice Adept series?  Or Heinlein's Glory Road?

Perhaps a working definition would halp clear it up.
--
Eric Alfred Burns                        "Life is full of decisions
Solipsist at Large                        but you never get to make any."
"It's all in your mind"
IK20001@maine.maine.edu                           --Linus Van Pelt
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: adc@tardis.msu.edu (Alan D. Cabrera)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Reply-To: adc@tardis.msu.edu
Organization: Michigan State University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 01:42:47 GMT


Wow!  A lot of replies on this RFD.  Some level headed, most not,
almost all against splitting.

Before any more spastic drivel gets posted let me say that if the
number of people for the split don't speak up soon I definitely won't
go on to an CVF.  (I think I've just heard more than a few sighs of
relief)  As I mentioned before, I'm not doing this, as Jeff Coleburn
would have it, to spite everyone in r.g.n but followed Tom Holub's
advise that if I genuinely was interested in the split then I should
post an RFD; so I did.

If there are those who are slightly interested please note that it's my
understanding that the RFD can be, and should be, changed.  I posted it
as it was because I knew people would have suggestions for
modifications.  If you want to be one of the moderators.  Great!  If
you don't want me to be a moderator I really don't care and will let
someone else do it.

Please be patient with my replies as I think our news server is four
days behind.

---
Alan Cabrera				internet:  adc@tardis.cl.msu.edu
Computer Laboratory			phone:     (517) 353-3027
Michigan State University		fax:       (517) 353-9847
514 Computer Center			bitnet:    CABRERA@MSU
East Lansing, MI 48824

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:28:08 GMT

In article <H.ea.&YscglQNvGY@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca> jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca  
(John Henders) writes:
> In <1992Nov16.000449.1327@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van  
Huizen) writes:
> >In article <H.ea.XemlKcz4uRo@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca>  
jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca  
> 	Well, failing to recognise one of the author's names and accusing
> him of being unhelpful seemed to indictate a certain lack of  
familiarity.
> 

I'm sorry if I didn't recall your name as one of the authors. I could see  
how that would offend you, but it doesn't mean that I haven't read them. I  
don't recall any authors' names from this year's California voter's  
pamphlets either but I read those. 



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: erik@maui.til.com (Erik Horstkotte)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.ai.fuzzy
Organization: Togai InfraLogic, Inc.
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:40:35 GMT

In article <599@ulogic.UUCP>, hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
|> seconded.  if we're talking about fuzzy logic, sci.logic.fuzzy
|> sounds like a good place.  although I do like the idea of it being
|> under the comp heirarchy, I can't think of a good place (it seems
|> my comp.algorithms.* proposal wasn't very well liked :)

Well, you have to admit that there is more than an algorithm to fuzzy
logic.  Similarly, although the field is generally referred to as
"genetic algorithms", there is a lot more to the field than the
algorithms.  A broader title is appropriate.

I do wish we'd hear a comment from Mike Arras on switching the name
to sci.logic.fuzzy instead of comp.ai.fuzzy.
-- 
Erik Horstkotte, Togai InfraLogic, Inc.
The World's Source for Fuzzy Logic Solutions (The company, not me!)
erik@til.com, gordius!til!erik - (714) 975-8522
info@til.com for info, fuzzy-server@til.com for fuzzy mail-server
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 15:21:31 GMT

In article <Bxv6qn.7p9@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil> dobson@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (LCDR Michael Dobson) writes:
> Unfortunately Peter you've missed an increasingly larger number of sites, the
> stand-alone site that was set up by someone else as a one time deal, runs on
> auto-pilot, and for which there is no support.

Anyone who sets up a site like that without spending time explaining what's
going on should be shot. I don't even give someone a feed unless I know they
have a clue. I have sympathy for people in that position, but I'm not
interested in reorganizing Usenet practice around their needs.

> It used to be that USENET was defined as the set of sites that got
> news.announce.newusers (or was that news.announce.newgroups?) but not any
> more.

That's the definition I use.

> Now none of the above are reasons to invalidate properly conducted votes, but
> we as a group need to be aware of the increasing number of sites in the above
> situation and do our best to help them out.

Help, yes. I'll support people like that on a case by case basis. That's it.
-- 
Peter da Silva / 77487-5012 USA / +1 713 274 5180
true(<<VV$@\\$'&O 9$O%'$LT$&$"V6"$&$<4$?'&$ #I&&?$=$<<@)24 24 scale 3 21 moveto
{dup 36 eq{pop not}{dup 7 and 4 sub exch 56 and 8 div 4 sub 2 index{rlineto}{
rmoveto}ifelse}ifelse}forall stroke pop showpage % Har du kramat din varg idag?
From: karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: CFV? What's a CFV??
Date: 21 Nov 1992 19:17:36 GMT
Organization: Mindcraft, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: pangea.stanford.edu

In article <1992Nov20.231652.17809@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish) writes:
>>If you find a way to eliminate ignorance and bozodom, please
>>tell us about it.  
>
>One way is to try and appeal to those who (by the very label) claim a 
>higher awareness, and ask them for tolerance. 
>
>But that's not working.

My point was that no structural changes to the newsgroup
creation guidelines will eliminate the need for
participants in the management of the newsgroup hierarchy
to learn about USENET and pay attention to the issues.

Most people who are willing to do these things find it
possible to participate in the process as it is now
implemented.  People who try, in good faith, and still have
problems are usually extended the type of tolerance and
help Dave seems to be requesting.

Bozos who mindlessly attack the process before they
understand it, or who demand that it serve ends it is
incapable of serving in the context of the USENET
participatory anarchy, deserve no such tolerance.  Even so,
they usually are extended the courtesy of polite
explanations of the problems with their views before having
their names entered in kill files.  Some of them are able
to comprehend the limitations of their proposals.  Others
wind up in seemingly endless discussions with people who
are content to amuse themselves by pulling legs off
arthropods and watching them flail.
--

    Chuck Karish          karish@mindcraft.com
    (415) 323-9000 x117   karish@pangea.stanford.edu
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Documentation Ideas
Date: 21 Nov 92 02:14:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: talon.1ek62hINNik6
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: skyking.oce.orst.edu

In article <By19DI.8JA@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> ksdavis@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Karleen S. Davis) writes:
>Concerning the suggested "User's Guide," stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU
>(John Stanley) writes: 
>>How, pray tell, would you include the information on how to vote in such
>>a manual, when the actual "how to vote" information differs for each and

>I have many ideas for the User's Guide that will handle the diversity
>of newsgroup voting opportunities.  The point of the document is not
>to tell people the "how to vote" information that is specific to each
>vote, but rather to deal with other issues, like. . .

For a document that is aimed at people who don't care about the process
other than how to vote, this will be a LOT of extraneous material. Not
that such a document is bad, but it will not do what it is claimed to do
... tell people how to vote.

>Cool! How do I do it?  (Summary; reference to the companion document 
>	"How To Create. . .", suggestion to become familiar with process 
>	before attempting it, maybe a *brief* rundown of the timeline)

1. a STRONG suggestion to become familiar with the process. Perhaps
stronger than suggestion.

2. a VERY brief synopsis of the material, so that it will not go out of
date when Dave Hayes rewrites the guidelines for us.

>. . .and other stuff that hasn't occured to me yet.  In short, I
>believe there's good reason to remove the rules from the theory

I don't. Having a document of just rules opens things up to the charge
that the rules are arbitrary. There will be those who see only the
rules document and not the theory, but not if both are in the same one.

>(remember, the User's Guide is supposed to be aimed at new users so
>they know what a vote is when they're hit by one).  

How about "when they experience one"? 
Newsgroups: news.groups