HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: To keep the r.m.s rename is _not_ elitist (was Re: *BAD*...)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 14:19:17 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov:
>chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>    How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup
>
>That should be "How to avoid getting your newsgroup changed without
>your knowledge"...or "You too can participate in newsgroup politics".

Oh, man, now you are going to carp on the titles of the periodic
postings?!  Can't you stop retreating and retrenching long enough to
realize that you've lost this battle?
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
                 just another elitist Usenet administrator
From: dseal@armltd.co.uk (David Seal)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.games.frp.campaign
Date: 10 Nov 92 11:07:10 GMT
Distribution: news
Organization: A.R.M. Ltd, Swaffham Bulbeck, Cambs, UK

In article <1992Nov7.045422.27884@beaver.cs.washington.edu>
tsang@cs.washington.edu (Donald Tsang) writes:

>(e) Posting once-monthly FAQ's, Campaign Statistics, etc would be
>    welcome on rec.games.frp.archives, just as Campaign Moves would
>    be.  The two main reasons for .archives' existence are: the posting
>    of "fluff", and the posting of articles that give useful
>    information without being actual "announcements".  Examples of the
>    latter include: new character classes (for systems with character
>    classes), NPC descriptions, and secret society or cult descriptions.

I think you've missed the main reason for r.g.f.archives' existence. It is
simply a repository for articles that are especially suitable for archiving
- i.e. works which are in some sense "complete" and that somebody might want
to look up in the future. Being "fluff" is not in itself a good criterion
for posting in r.g.f.archives: being an frp story is, since stories are the
sort of item that people come into half way through and want to look up the
earlier parts in the archives. Nor indeed is being an announcement in itself
a disqualification, though most announcements are pointers to something else
and thus not complete works.

But I would agree that r.g.f.archives is the right place for Campaign Moves:
like stories, written-up campaigns are likely to be things that people start
reading half way through and want to know what happened before.

David Seal
dseal@armltd.co.uk

All opinions are mine only...
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: rec.music.makers.*: chronology and comments from the vote-taker.
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff & Nonsense Division
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 23:59:19 GMT

In article <1992Nov13.164753.35047@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:

>I think that multiple unrelated votes should
>not be on a single call-for-votes and ballot.

Part of the stickiness of this issue arises from the fact that the
votes *were* related: they were part of a concerted effort to draw
together several related groups spread throughout Usenet and altnet
into a single, more logical hierarchy.

>I also think that when there is a ballot with
>multiple votes, there should be a separate
>announcement relating to each of the votes,
>and that the subject of each such announcement
>should make it clear that a vote is in
>progress and which newsgroup the vote is for.

I think that would make sense, too, but I can't say that that should
be a part of the official guidelines.  Why not?  Because it would be
impossible to monitor.  The guidelines require that all RFDs and CFVs
be crossposted to news.announce.newgroups, so that the moderator can
ensure that the post is structured properly, has come at the right
time relative to other proposals for the affected group or groups, has
followups set to news.groups (or "poster" in the case of CFVs) -- and
so that they can be archived for future reference.

While posting additional notices to each affected group individually
is an excellent idea, and I think one that should be employed more
often, how would that part of the process be controlled?  Who would
oversee, to make sure that such posts went out and to archive them?
Should they all be crossposted to news.announce.newgroups, like the
original RFDs?  It seems to me that would kill the purpose of
n.a.newgroups -- to have a minimal signal-to-noise ratio while
simultaneously providing a focal point for newsgroup proposals.  More
informed users than I might want to comment on that issue.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: rorschak@daimi.aau.dk (Jesper Lauridsen)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Xanth Watch
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 21:46:07 GMT

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

>> 
>> "RFD". "CFV". Very clear.
>> 
>To some, not to others.

You only have to read a single RFD or CFV in your lifetime to learn
what that means. 

>How about if you saw hundreds of ballots a week, for all 50 states? Would  
>you take the time to read them all? And a lot of things that LOOKED like  
>ballots were actually political commentary advertisements?

There only a handful of groups being proposed each week. And unless you
read news.* you are only going to see one once in a while. And none of
them are "political commentary advertisements" or whatever their 
equvilant on Usenet are.

-- 
Jesper Lauridsen        |  I survived the rec.arts.sf-lovers split
rorschak@daimi.aau.dk   | 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca ()
Subject: rec.games.frp.campaign
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:38:24 GMT

I will no longer respond to flames.  This 'discussion' is degenerating into
a flame war where some opponents of my proposed newsgroup have degenerated
to the point of personal slander.  I haven't been innocent either, in that
I've been inflamatory in my replies.

I am still, as always, open to discussion of the proposal (un updated
version of which follows).

And *no* when I say slander I mean this in a general sense, as in speaking
slanderously, I'm not actually trying to accuse anyone of slander (forgot the
#3421 rule of Usenet -- never accuse someone of slander). :)

Anyway, the updated proposal follows....

Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy,rec.music.synth
From: ljnelson@unix.amherst.edu (Laird Nelson)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:45:08 GMT

Dave Hayes (dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov) wrote:

      that they aren't there. Ignorance hides two votes...those that don't care
      and those that don't know that they can or should care. It is those 
      latter
      who NEED to be addressed...or this similar thing will happen AGAIN and 
      AGAIN and AGAIN and...
      
      Look, can't you even see that there is a problem?

As a matter of fact, no.  I was under the impression that that's what the 3
or 4 calls-for-votes were for.  Perhaps not.  Maybe I'm being rash in assuming
that with three or four chances to cast votes, those who were ignorant of
the matter sealed their own fate?  How much more public could the CFV have
been?  I suppose it could have been broadcast on local NPR radio stations...

LAiRD

--
ljnelson@unix.amherst.edu           |
ljnelson@amh.amherst.edu            |          The Quintet-essential.
(413) 542-2932                      |
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 18:59:55 GMT

jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>>Then so be it. I am willing to change, however. You aren't. Why?
>Because I am not the one trying to sabotage the expressed will of the net.

Now who's blowing things out of proportion? Look, until you can prove
that this is the expressed will of a majority of the net then might 
I suggest you stop trying to make this a net.criminal matter? 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

The King decided to force his subjects to tell the truth. Nasrudin was 
first in line.  They asked him, "Where are you going?  Tell the truth
or be hanged"  "I am going," said Nasrudin, "to be hanged on that gallows."  
"I don't believe you."  "Very well, if I have told a lie, then hang me!" 
"But that would make it the truth!" "Exactly," said Nasrudin, "your truth."
From: pcunnell@micrognosis.co.uk (Paul Cunnell)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Give up, Dave, you've lost!
Date: 13 Nov 92 17:21:00 GMT
Organization: Micrognosis, London, UK.

In article <1992Nov12.115101.14142@wes.on.ca>, tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:

...(stuff deleted)
|> 
|> For the last 24 hours (which is as long as we've had r.m.m.s here):
|> 
|>     Group			rec.music.synth	  rec.music.maker.synth
|>     # of articles                79                   45
|>     # of newsgroup flames        35                    1
|>     # of "real" synth articles   44                   44
|> 
...(more stuff deleted)

|> Doesn't look quite dead, does it?
|> 
|> Give up, Dave -- even the synth readers have accepted r.m.m.s!

And the *real* difference, of course, is that on r.m.m.s one doesn't have to
wade through a zillion flames to find something worth reading. Should work
rather well, actually - give it a month or two and Dave will have driven
all but the flamers out of rec.music.synth into r.m.m.s. Then all we'll
need is a swift rmgroup, and peace will reign once more...

|> 
|> [ \tom haapanen  "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
|> [ tomh@wes.on.ca                 "trust the programmer" -- ansi c standard ]
|> [ waterloo engineering software    "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]

-- 
Paul Cunnell (pcunnell@micrognosis.co.uk) 
Micrognosis, 63 Queen Victoria Street, London, EC4N 4UD, UK +44 71 815 5294 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It is truly amazing what you can do without hardware docs or source code.
Absolutely astounding. I can't believe I've wasted so much of my life doing
this." Theo de Raadt (deraadt@newt.cuc.ab.ca) 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:24:42 GMT

In article <2AFE7531.6123@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
> According to jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II):
> >You should not have to read news.announce.newgroups to know what is
> >happening to any other newsgroup.
> 
> I disagree.  It is best that all proposals be localized.

Localization has nothing to do with pointers to where the conversation is  
taking place. Are you trying to move us BACKWARDS?

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky news.groups:20857 news.admin.policy:237
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 9 Nov 92 20:04:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.BxGt38.6x6
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography

In article <1992Nov9.094324.11431@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>This argument degenerates to:
>
>"And a revote now would almost certainly not pass, now that the readership
>is aware. So THAT'S why so many newsgroup clique people don't wnat a revote
>at any cost. Not because of the guidelines, but because they know the real 
>will of the net."

That is just baloney. I don't give a shit about rec.music.whatever. I
don't care whether the renaming passed or not. I don't care whether the
next vote you take on the matter passes or not. I doubt that many other
people arguing against you care one way or the other.

There was a vote, and the results of the vote showed that the "will of
the net" was to rename r.m.s. Now you want us to accept all the mail in
your mailbox as the "will of the net".

I am sorry, but that just doesn't cut it. The only method we have of
knowing the "will of the net" is the vote. Until you come up with a
better system, live with it. And, no, your mailbox is not a better
system.

Those who want to have a hand in the structure of the net, be it even
just their little corner, have to have enough interest to vote when
votes are held. Otherwise, why bother to vote in the first place? Why
don't we just have shouting matches, and those who can post often
enough and stridently enough get their groups formed, and those who
can't, don't? Why not just toss the guidelines altogether and become
alt?
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 10 Nov 1992 16:33:19 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Nov9.211128.3244@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
>This argument of people not caring  
>enough and waiting is old and obstructive. Please move on.

Nope...this argument is half of the point. (I discussed the other half in my
message to Dave Hayes a moment ago.) If they don't care, why should I?
-- 
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: nadeau@bcarh1ab.bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: RFD: Should rec.music.makers.synth stand as a group name?
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:39:27 GMT

In article <BxIHor.Es@uunet.uu.net> Dave Hayes <dave@elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov> writes:
>
>This is a request for discussion on letting rec.music.makers.synth stand
>as a replacement for rec.music.synth. 

This is an absurd proposal.  Should you be so foolish as to issue a CFV,
I will vote against it.  (And campaign for others to do so!)
Maintaining a halfway sane News site is hard enough even when the
Guidelines and voting procedures are followed; if we start allowing
these to be disregarded whenever anyone dislikes the results would lead
to anarchy (or, even worse, to the alt hierarchy :-) ).  And there are
always people who dislike a result, though few are as persistent as you
are, Dave.  For which I can only be grateful!

Sorry, but the vote has been held, and it's final - that's the way
things work.  (In your U.S.  elections, would they hold a revote if
enough people suddenly decided they didn't like Clinton, but they hadn't
bothered to vote because they hadn't realized the consequences?)

Perhaps the group would have been better left as rec.music.synth (though
nothing you've said, however often you repeated it, has convinced me of
that).  And your dislike of the new name is insufficient justification
for rejecting a valid vote.

At the very least, wait a while - things might not seem so bad once the
change has actually gone through.  Then, if things have clearly
deteriorated, you can issue an RFD for a rename.  But to undo a
legitimate vote, because you *believe* the name change will be bad for
most people involved, is at the very least premature.

If anything, your complaining has caused far more trouble than the name
change possibly could.

The Rhealist - Rheal Nadeau - nadeau@bnr.ca - Speaking only for myself
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Dave Hayes will not quit
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff & Nonsense Division
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 05:54:53 GMT

In article <141191@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> gary_preckshot@lccmail.ocf.llnl.gov (gary preckshot) writes:

>Mr. Salzenberg and Mr. Nelson are certainly reasons why Mr. Hayes shouldn't
>quit.  Their supercilious dismissal of his valid concerns is hardly
>professional conduct for a system administrator, which many claim to be.

Is Hayes' expressed intent not to honor the newgroup for
rec.music.makers.synth "professional conduct for a system
administrator?"

>Somehow, the fact that Usenet groups exist for the
>benefit of the actual users seems to have escaped serious consideration.

Not in anyone's mind.  My job as administrator is to continue
supplying this service to my users; as users, their responsibility is
to participate in the process of group creation and reorganization.
If many of them did not vote for the reorganization because they
didn't notice the announcement, that's a shame.  Life is full of them.

>A way to discover whether Mr. Hayes really "speaks for the People" is to redo
>the vote, with attention this time to ensuring that participants in
>rec.music.synth are well and truly notified of all of the issues to be
>decided about the group.

The people can speak for themselves, I expect.  I have seen at best
ambivalence about the move from readers of rec.music.synth, once the
rename enthusiasts and rename opponents have cancelled one another
out.

>Sophomoric comments like the one above by Mr. Nelson
>don't reflect on anybody but Mr. Nelson.

How's that metalworking group coming, Preckshot?

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.solid-state.electronics
Date: 13 Nov 1992 16:45:19 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx
NNTP-Posting-Host: crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu


Good idea, bad name. The name should be sci.electronics.solid-state



-- 
Richard H. Miller                 Email: rick@bcm.tmc.edu
Asst. Dir. for Technical Support  Voice: (713)798-3532
Baylor College of Medicine        US Mail: One Baylor Plaza, 302H
                                           Houston, Texas 77030
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 08:39:32 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.211256.352@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:

>There are people out there who cannot vote due to the fact that the BBS
>that they echo the group on has no email facilities. Is the vote really
>open to anyone out there? How do THEY vote? 

Well, Dave, by now this discussion has been widely propagated on BBSs
throughout the world.  Why don't we let the participants *there* speak
up and tell us whether they care?  Whether it makes any difference?
Whether they even understand the terminology of "newsgroups" and
"Usenet" and "reorganization?"

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: ijaz@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Tahir Ijaz)
Subject: Re: Islam and Ahmadiyya -- Enough
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:06:29 GMT

In <1992Nov5.222013.5810@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> rana@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (Nabeel Ahmad Rana) writes:

>randall-joshua@yale.edu (Joshua Randall) writes:

>>[Dislaimer:  I neither know very much nor have anything against either
>>Islam or Ahmadiyya.]

>>It would seem to me that the discussion of a new group has evolved
>>into a religious debate.  I would respectfully suggest that it be
>>moved to one of the religious groups; it does not belong here.

>>Thank you.

>>-- 
>>Joshua E. Randall                       randall@minerva.cis.yale.edu

>Sir, this is one of the main reasons for the demand of such a
>newsgroup. Soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya would be form for such
>debates. Ahmadiyya Islam is a topic which interests people from
>all religious backgrounds.

>Sincerely,

>-- 
>Nabeel A. Rana
>rana@rintintin.colorado.edu
>LOVE FOR ALL : HATRED FOR NONE.
>________________________________________________________________

I agree with Mr Rana.  The fierce debate generated only shows the need for
this newsgroup- SRIA.

DR Tahir Ijaz
-- 
=============        ======     ============      ==       ========
     ||                ||            ||         //  \\          // 
     ||                ||            //        ========       //
     ||       0      ======     =====        //        \\  ========   M.D.
Xref: sparky news.groups:21226 rec.games.frp.misc:8165
From: gary_preckshot@lccmail.ocf.llnl.gov (gary preckshot)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Claymores
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:21:26 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: LLNL

In article <1992Nov11.024041.9136@zia.aoc.nrao.edu>, awkerr@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Alan Kerr) writes:
> 

> close but no cigar (it's bad for you anyway).  The claymore is
> *gaelic* for "big sword", as you seem to know.  That is because it's
> the sword that was developed in Scotland.  The Scottish never
> developed a "zweihander" style of sword.  The zwiehander is *germanic*
> for "two-hander" as you know.  It's the type of sword that was
> developed in *that* area (central Europe).
> 

Well, then I'm really interested to have you tell us what a skien dhu and
a dirk are.  Just checking on your Gaelic.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: CS341A002@Husky1.StMarys.Ca (Loki)
Subject: Re: RFD:  rec.games.frp.campaign
Organization: The Underground
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:04:58 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.13.SMU

picl17@fsphy1.physics.fsu.edu writes:
>tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn) writes...
>>Travis writes:
>>>I think that we don't really need this as a place to run campaigns in, 
>>>However the idea of a forum in which to discuss ideas relating to campaign 
>>>games and issues relating to campaigns is a good idea.
>> 
>>Congratulations.  You've just hit on the *exact* job of rec.games.frp
>>{misc | dnd} depending on whether you are playing xD&D or not.  Why 
>>not there?
>
>No.  This is not the job of rec.games.frp.misc/dnd.  Their job currently
>INCLUDES this, but it is not their sole purpose.  Most of the traffic I
>have seen on these two groups is rule-oriented rather than campaign-oriented.

   And campaigns don't use rules?

   Face it... discussion of role-playing campaigns includes *all* of
role-playing, outside of tournament-style one-shot adventures.

   This is the key problem a lot of the r.g.f.c advocates seem to have
missed...

         Loki         | cs341a002@husky1.stmarys.ca | Brynjolfr Myrkjartanarson
 often sysop of TWWOL | cs341a002@stmarys.bitnet    |    Compaignie Mercurie

When you vomit on someone, that's usually a social faux
pas from which there is no recovery... no vomit sympathy
cards from Hallmark... "Next time, lunch is on me..."

                 --- Anonymous
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy,rec.music.synth
From: pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)
Subject: Re: Music Group Reorg Disagreement (was Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored)
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 18:01:41 GMT

In <1992Nov9.100735.11698@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>Something has to be done about this attitude. What's wrong with being
>flexible for a change? (A *real* change) 

You want flexible, stick with alt.net.

>Not true. By the letter of the law (which you all seem to be so intent
>on holding to) I can hold an immediate revote. The point is that the 
>damage will be done. An rmgroup will damage the group irreparably. 

I don't know about other newsadmins, but I generally don't immediately
rmgroup the group; rather I alias it for a period of time and rmgroup it
after it seems that the traffic has died down.
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
               It is said that the Devil has all the best tunes.
                             This is broadly true.
                    But Heaven has the best choreographers.
Newsgroups: news.groups