HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [soc.motss]  Re: advice sought: handling on-street harassment
Followup-To: alt.censorship,soc.motss
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 02:58:58 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject:  Re: advice sought: handling on-street harassment
Date: 31 Aug 1992 18:20:10 -0700

In article <la592nINNqfb@news.bbn.com> 
rrizzo@star-trek.bbn.com (Ron Rizzo) writes:

> Recently while passing through the main square of a well-known 
> college town known for its tolerance of street orators and performers 
> of all kinds, a couple of gay men were verbally gaybashed by religious 
> fundamentalists.  As the men walked by, one of the fundies shouted at 
> them, and, I guess, for the benefit of onlookers, "THE SEXUALLY IMMORAL 
> CANNOT ENTER HEAVEN!*"  [...]
> What, if anything, of a legal, political, tactical or organizational nature
> can be done about such occurences?  Can they be arrested for assault, sued,
> reported to the police or city hall?  [...]

A couple of years ago, West Hollywood was overrun on the weekends
by Fundies who'd harrass people walking down the street, shouting
things similar to what you've quoted here.  I've always responded
to these people the same way: if they're standing in front of me,
a request such as "Get the fuck out of my way, asshole" usually 
suffices, particularly when I put on my nasty-faggot-from-hell
expression; if they try to hand me something, I don't reach to
take it from them; if they shout something at me, I shout something
scabrous back at them.  But they don't annoy me, since they're so
clearly delusional.  But they *did* bother a lot of people, so
a group got together and named themselves something confrontational
(I can't remember what, exactly, but it was a take off on Lesbian
Vampires from Sodom), and they followed the fundies around and did to
them what the fundies were attempting to do to others.  The fundies
did finally go away after a few months, and the street theater 
aspect was fun for a couple of weeks, but I think it was an
overreaction.

I would just ignore them.  

Arne

--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From: sjsobol@tiny.com (Steven J. Sobol)
Reply-To: sjsobol@tiny.com (Steven J. Sobol)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.culture.african.american,alt.activism,misc.legal,soc.culture.usa,oh.general
Distribution: world
Subject: Re: [UPI] High court strikes down ethnic intimidation law
Organization: The Tiny Software Company, Main Office, Cleveland, Ohio
Date: Tue,  1 Sep 92 00:34:00 

ppessi@vipunen.hut.fi (Pekka Pessi) writes:

>	Difference between manslaughter and murder is "intent to
>	kill". Difference between burning a cross or burning a fire is
>	"intent to express an opinion". It may be an ugly, hateful,
>	disgusting opinion, but it *is* an expression of opinion. For
>	some reason killing is not specially protected unlike
>	expression.

"For some reason...?"  It sounds like you think it should be protected! :-)

Murder, unlike expression of an opinion, can be hazardous to one's health!
:-)

(of course, this also depends on how you go about expressing that opinion.)

--Steve

-- 
***  **  ** | The Tiny Software Co.  23707 Glenhill  Cleveland OH 44122
 *  *   *   | Steve Sobol * President * sjsobol@tiny.com or tiny!sjsobol 
 *   *  *   | Alternate addresses: sjsobol@wariat.org or ag510@po.cwru.edu
 *    * *   | Disclaimer: I *AM* the Tiny Software Company. 
 *  **   ** | **Welcome to Ohio, the Land of the Orange Construction Barrel**

Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Limiting religious speech
Date: 1 Sep 92 20:29:12 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

Thus spake aultj@rpi.edu (Jim Ault): 

>In article <24bn#gr.adamsr@netcom.com> adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams) writes:
>
>	   Thanks, but I'll stick with the concept that secular subjects belong
>   in the schools, that books refering to religion in any but a literary manner
>   don't belong in the classroom, and that religious education belongs in the
>   chruches and homes.
>
>	   Not only does this protect MY children, it protects those of the
>   Christian as well.
>
>I would not say that the children of Christians are protected in
>public schools at all.  They are not protected from meditation
>techniques that come from eastern religions, "values clarification"
>techniques that tell them not to obey their parents and to disregard
>the values that their parents are trying to teach them, or "sex
>education" classes that hand out condoms and show pornographic films.
>
>No, my children are not protected from the secular humanist dogma of
>the public schools at all.

	Gee, you recite your Wildmon really well! The AFA must be proud of
you!

	Doesn't it bother you a bit that every claim you have made above has
been disputed by nearly every public school teacher in the US? Or do you
believe that they are all part of a "secular humanist conspiricy" to corrupt
your children? 

	I really wish a voucher system WOULD come into existence - then you
fundies could put your kids in Christian schools where they could receive
the kind of narrow minded education that would insure their failure in
society, and the public schools would be left alone.

	Of course, knowing Wildmon's attitude toward the rights of others,
that STILL wouldn't solve the problem.  He and his brainwashed followers
would STILL believe that they had the right to dictate what OTHER people's
children should be taught.


-- 
    rick.adams on GEnie   /|\        You are right from your side,        
     adamsr@netcom.com  /  |  \        And I am right from mine.          
    adamsr@irie.ais.org \ /|\ /  We're both just one too many mornings,   
   adamsr@norwich.bitnet  \|/  And a thousand miles behind. (c Bob Dylan) 
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.culture.african.american,alt.activism,misc.legal,soc.culture.usa
From: kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: [UPI] High court strikes down ethnic intimidation law
Organization: The Rhode Island Internet Systems Cooperative Network
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 01:58:22 GMT

david@gdstech.grumman.com (David Nettles) writes:

>There
>is a difference between scrawling ''Joanie loves Chachi'' on a
>deli-owners wall and scrawling ''Niggers Go Home!''."

Either way, its property damage. I don't care what you write.

MD
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your 
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com            /  parents never had it, chances 
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won't either...
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.culture.african.american,alt.activism,misc.legal,soc.culture.usa,oh.general
From: fine@soccer.cis.ohio-state.edu (Thomas A. Fine)
Subject: Re: [UPI] High court strikes down ethnic intimidation law
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:13:08 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.131307.8755@gdstech.grumman.com> david@gdstech.UUCP (David Nettles) writes:
>"What is the difference between manslaughter and murder?", I asked.
>
>"I don't know?"
>
>"Intent.  It is the intent that decides whether or not the accused
>will spend ten years in prison or fifty or even further receive the
>death penalty.  It is the intent that makes all the difference.  There
>is a difference between scrawling ''Joanie loves Chachi'' on a
>deli-owners wall and scrawling ''Niggers Go Home!''."

Intent is not Motive, and vice-versa.  A hate crime is motivated by hate.
It is not an intention to hate.  Suppose I hate african-americans (I
don't!), and I accidentally kill an african-american in a car
accident.  I may be guilty of manslaughter, but my hate certainly doesn't
escalate that crime to murder.

If the intent in a hate-crime is to disrupt society, create conflict,
whatever, then that MAY be a valid avenue to pursue in a courtroom.
Damn hard to prove that sort of intent though.

	 tom
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: The Establishment Clause
Organization: nope
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:35:50 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.195215.23613@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> rwd4f@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Rob Dobson) writes:
>Ok, people, read your Bill of Rights. Not only can no law be passed
>interfering with free excercise of religion, no law respecting the
>establishment of religion may be passed either. I keep reading these
>posts about the SC 'stifling religious speech' which act as if they
>stopped reading the 1st admendment before the establishment clause.
>
>Yes, the government CAN restrict the speech of government agencies.
>In fact, the govt MUST restrict the speech of govt agencies to prevent these
>agencies from 'eastablishing' Christianity as a government approved religion.

Yes.

The interesting thing, noted by Lawrence Tribe and other
constitutional scholars who push a broad definition of religion when
it comes to the establishment clause, is that using the same
definition for the free exercise clause can cause some problems for an
"active" govt.

Tribe points out that taxing people to support various social programs
does interfere with the free exercise of their religion, at least it
is an interference if we go with religion as defined when we're
talking about the establishment clause and we don't play games with
what it means to prohibit free exercise.

Tribe argues that we should use a different definition of religion
for the two clauses because the alternative is that govt can't do
things he wants govt to do.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: grimlok@hubcap.clemson.edu (Mike Percy)
Subject: Re: Limiting religious speech
Organization: Clemson University
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:26:52 GMT

aultj@rpi.edu (Jim Ault) writes:

>Enforced secularism is not the same as religious pluralism. 
 
But as a practical matter, religious pluralism is an unobtainable goal.
Imagine going to a graduation ceremony and sitting, standing, kneeling
(to give proper respect) through prapyers representing each of the major
religions, plus minor ones which might be practiced by the students,
like Wicca, Satanism, paganism, Toaism, Zen, Zoarastrinism, ...  Imagine
the disruptions some of these would cause, but they must be included if
pluralism is to be obtained.  

Enforced secularity (i.e. lack of religiosity, as opposed to the
"religion" of secular humanism), _is_ attainable.

Mike Percy             | grimlok@hubcap.clemson.edu  | I don't know about
Sr. Systems Analyst    | mspercy@clemson.clemson.edu | your brain, but mine
Info. Sys. Development | mspercy@clemson.BITNET      | is really...bossy.
Clemson University     | (803) 656-3780              | (Laurie Anderson)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: tsh@lesti.hut.fi (Timo Hyv|nen)
Subject: Populated (was: Re: "Gender Flags" -- for lack of a better term.)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: 28 Aug 92 05:31:56 GMT

In <Bto3MM.69E@cs.dal.ca> franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:

>hunk-o'-dung as #hotsex is the most populated channel...

C'mon...during daytime (EET) #42 is by far the most populated channel ;)
-- 
I					/ tsh@hut.fi   Timo Hyvonen	I
I           Arbeit macht Geld           / Vuorikatu 22B44 Hki Finland	I
I   	  				/ +358-0-654 062		I
I					/ +358-49-704 424		I
Newsgroups: decr.chat,ee.chat,alt.irc
From: bevan@mame.mu.OZ.AU (Bevan Anderson)
Subject: Its all TheCure's fault
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:40:16 GMT


Its ALL TheCure's fault !!!!!

Now.. how do you spell WASTED!?

Bevan..
--
bevan@sungear.mame.mu.OZ.AU  / Phone +61 3 481 4382  /..{{  _____  __o  
bevan@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU  /  Work +61 3 344 6721  /...{   _____  _\<,	
bevan@ecr.mu.OZ.AU       /   Fax +61 3 349 2182  /. ..{{  ----- (*)'(*)
       L I V E  F A S T  H I T  H A R D  D I E  Y O U N G ! !
Newsgroups: alt.irc,alt.irc.corruption
From: titus@cheops.anu.edu.au (Titus Chiu)
Subject: Re: Watch This Space
X-Disclaimer: The contents of this article are not remotely connected to ANU in anyway, in fact even I am not responsible. The devil made me do it, just like   Mr. A isn't responsible for his actions, the devil likes to see other's private msgs..
Organization: Australian National University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 10:49:56 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.064610.24788@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU> troy@cbme.unsw.EDU.AU (Troy Rollo) writes:
>			Watch this space.

watch that log... ;P

-- 
titus chiu                                   -- email: ---------------------
                                             ---- titus@coombs.anu.edu.au --
  dont drink and drive home                  ---- titus@turing.ORG ---------
  get stoned and fly home.                   -------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: sfadden@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (Steve Fadden)
Subject: local IRC servers listing?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 20:37:00 GMT

I am very new to IRC -- are there any local (public/no-fee) servers available
that I could connect to?  I would like to participate but have yet to find a 
server on this side of the continent (northeast).

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!  (Please reply by E-Mail).

Thanks.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: Steve Fadden                                    sfadden@ucsvax.ucc.umass.edu :
: The opinions expressed here are solely my own, and I rather like that fact.  :
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: jeffo@uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson-Owens)
Subject: Re: /summon command?
Reply-To: jeffo@uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson-Owens)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:05:17 GMT

randall@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (THE Upholder of Truth) writes
> Not their client.. but another client on the same host.

Doesn't sound to me like that would fall within the bounds of what a  
client does.  Also, since there would be no way to turn this messaging off  
(like you can turn talk and write requests off via "mesg n" or "chmod go-w  
`tty`") it might be better if the summoning went through mail.

If it did go through mail, it could be a trivial add-on to make a server  
summon any user that can be reached by mail.

dprust@carroll1.cc.edu (Dan Prust) writes:
> Exactly what is wrong (or so damn hard) with using another of the ports
> (extensive number of which can be used) to run a seperate summoning
> program?   

To this, I'd say nothing is hard about it, but that's another port that  
could be used for a different program.
--
-- Jeff (jeffo@uiuc.edu)
-- no NeXTmail please
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: gseidman@umbc4.umbc.edu (Jack of Shadows)
Subject: Re: "Gender Flags" -- for lack of a better term.
Keywords: gender
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 14:02:31 GMT

There are still a few people protesting the idea of gender flags, but
most people seem to be complaining not about the theory but the
practice. Naturally, there is no way all the servers will install a
little hack in the code to record or even pass on gender information.
Having it as a field in a /who list is near-impossible (I think it would
take some hacking of the client code, too), at least in the near future.

What can be done, however, is to use the built-in CTCP and /on commands
in your .ircrc... why was CTCP created? for expandability. If enough
people find the CTCP version of a gender flag useful, it is possible
that the illustrious IRC.writers will be inspired to include it as a
field in the /who list in a major revision of the Server and Client
software. Complaining about wanting a gender flag but doing nothing
toward making do will hardly convince people, especially those who have
the authority/ability to do so, to change anything.

This is a repost of the CTCP gender flag, dare I say, standard:

/ON -CTCP "* * GENDER *" /ctcp $0 $2 <your gender/nasty_response/whatever>
/ALIAS GENDER /CTCP $0 GENDER

/gender <nick> sends a CTCP request to <nick> for his/her gender, and if
(s)he has the first line in his/her .ircrc a CTCP reply will be
generated. If the /on line is not installed either a CTCP ERRMSG will be
generated, or nothing will happen (not sure which.... anyone?).

Anyone out there who is in favor of gender flags, install the CTCP
version and say so!

-ShadowJac (on IRC, anyway)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher)
Subject: Re: /summon command?
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarWatcher@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 05:17:51 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

Upholder@uiuc.edu (THE Upholder of Truth) writes:

: But... it seems that nobody is interested in /summon working as easliy
: as talk(1) requests... Oh well... it was just an idea to kick around anyway.

/summon is a neat idea, but given the current "mission" (out of lack of
a better word) of IRC, and availible alternatives, I really isn't essential.
I'd like to see IRC coders work on other problems or features (cf. ircd-three
mailing list) before messing around with /summon.

However, if IRC is to become the "new talk(1)" of the net, as I understand
the original IRC.writer(s) in Finland intended, then /summon ought to
be worked out, if only to have something analagous to a "talk request" --
an IRC summons.  (oooh!  Sounds ominous!  :)

--
Michael Adams (aka StarWatcher)            "A converted cannibal is one who,
StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (NeXT & internet)      on Friday, eats only fishermen."
wi.5467@wizvax.methuen.ma.us (anonymous)             -- Emily Lotney
FREE1217@UIUCVMD.bitnet (bitnet)
From: shadow@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Matt Mosley)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: "Gender Flags" -- The end of the thread.
Keywords: gender lame idiotic
Date: 2 Sep 92 21:34:10 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization

>ditto goes for RL conversations with people face-to-face.  I don't see
>any reason not to advertise one's gender on IRC if one is comfortable
>with it.  I don't think people would object to the idea of a picture
>for each nick (assuming that the bandwidth, etc., were there to
>support it), which would certainly give away not only gender but some
>rendition of physical appearance.

Oh, come on.  IRC takes up enough bandwidth already.  Why add more totally
useless features for the #hotsex crowd?

Matt...


-- 
|  Matt Mosley (cero/mattm on IRC)   Reality is fun! Anyway, it keeps me busy!
|  Internet mail: shadow@gnu.ai.mit.edu / mattm@silver.lcs.mit.edu
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: dmd39855@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Daniel M. DuBois)
Subject: Re: "Gender Flags" -- for lack of a better term.
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:38:59 GMT

notarus@uiuc.edu (Mark Notarus) writes:

> I'm not exactly known as paranoid, but at the same time, i really see
>a need for it. Why a gender flag? So i can tell if you're male or female?
>Why? Why can't i ASK you? Am i gonna speak to you different because you're
>male?

Actually.. I know I speak differently to females than I do to males...
Be it telling a dirty joke, or talking about old girlfreinds, or talking
about picking up guys, or talking about sports.... pretty much anything
in life is handled vastly differntly due to the other persons gender..
In any other situation in life, be it in person or on the phone, we
have access to this crucial sociological piece of information, why not on
irc?

How many of you guys greet other guys with: "hugz!" ?

-Dan
From: avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: I REQUEST RESPONSES TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTION...
Keywords: answers answers answers
Date: 30 Aug 92 07:43:13 GMT
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University

asamonte@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:

[...]
>First I would like to mention...that's three questions.  But, actually
>I don't think irc is too accessable.  There is 2 or 3 limiting factors.
>First, the person has to have access to a modem and the net.  The majority
>of people in the world don't have that.  Second, they have to know about irc
>before hand.  It's not something you can really 'stumble' upon.  Third
>You have to be able to get to it.  Usually that irc is installed on their
>site (though people can use telnet clients, that's why it was or 3)

You dont need a modem and you can stumble across it - I did :)

avalon
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: S_TITZ@iravcl.ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz)
Subject: Re: irc on Macs... PLEASE READ THIS!
Organization: Fachschaft Informatik, Uni Karlsruhe
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:46:15 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

In <1992Aug25.215905.15107@husc3.harvard.edu> vreddy@husc3.harvard.edu writes:

>  Sorry if this is an FAQ or something, but does anyone know if there is a
>  MAC protocol for irc... you know.. like there are MAIL protocols so that
>  an AppleTalk connection lets me check my mail with an icon like a regular
>  MAC application... Is there something like that for irc? Something in
>  development? Anyone wanna give me a tip on how to write one if there aren't
>  any already? Thanks... 

There is an IRC application for the Mac under development. A
pre-release can be gotten from
sumex-aim.stanford.edu: /info-mac/comm/ircle-047.hqx
Version 1.0 will be out in 1-2 weeks, hopefully.

This works via the MacTCP driver using the standard IRC protocol.
There is no special Mac IRC protocol, nor an implementation using only
AppleTalk, since IRC servers understand only TCP/IP.

Hope this helps.

MfG,
        Olaf
-- 
Olaf Titz - comp.sc.student - Univ of Karlsruhe - s_titz@iravcl.ira.uka.de -
uknf@dkauni2.bitnet - praetorius@irc - +49-721-60439 - did i forget something?
One frequently hears horror expressed that a 2M byte machine may have 400K
 devoted to its operating system. - Fred Brooks (1975)
From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: Smallest UNIX IRC Client
Date: 2 Sep 92 15:00:06 GMT
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <KEINANEN.92Sep2145234@elite.tre.tele.nokia.fi> keinanen@tre.tele.nokia.fi (Kai Keinanen) writes:


>Maybe irchat.el, which takes about 130k when uncompressed. The
>compressed tar files are about 60 k. It requires GNU Emacs, though. 

>Usually found at cc.tut.fi:/pub/irchat, newest versions in
>cs.hut.fi:/pub/irchat.

yes, but does this work with the latest servers? I got the newest beta
version, but I keep getting this remark 
symbol void irc-broadcast-parteners or somethgin like that. Anyone else
have luck with this thing?

steve
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA
From: Vandell@macpost.vanderbilt.edu (Guy VanDell)
Subject: Re: irc on Macs... PLEASE READ THIS!
Followup-To: alt.irc
Organization: Vanderbilt University
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 20:46:02 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.124615.24534@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>,
S_TITZ@iravcl.ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz) wrote:
> 
> Version 1.0 will be out in 1-2 weeks, hopefully.

will it have /dcc?




Guy VanDell 

Vandelhg@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
vandell@macpost.vanderbilt.edu