HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: CFV? What's a CFV??
Date: 24 Nov 1992 04:11:06 GMT
Organization: Mindcraft, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: pangea.stanford.edu

In article <1992Nov24.015648.21743@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish) writes:
>>>Existance of motivation does not infer its necessity.
>>[ Dave, please check on the meanings of subtle terms
>>like "infer" before you use them.  It'll make your postings
>>look much more polished and professional.  Thanks.]
>
>What part of that didn't you understand?

I understand all of it.  I also understand from it
that you have a command of the English language that's
less perfect than you think it is.

>You need a motive to be motivated. Most people aren't aware
>that a clear and present motive exists to be motivated to read
>(and memorize) this documentation. What seems to work by
>consensus _now_ is to have people's favorite newsgroups pulled
>out from under them and then to explain to them that they've
>beem remiss in the scope of their search for data. 

People who kill topics because their Subject: headers
contain acronyms they don't understand (along with quite
comprehensible plain-text explanations) deserve what they
get.  You're right, Dave; there's an arbitrary filter
that keeps the unmotivated out of usenet politics.
As there should be.

People who read news for free on poorly-administered
systems and are never shown how to find
news.announce.newusers are getting full value for their
money.

People who expect hand-holding to the extent that they feel
cheated because others expect them to RTFM are in the wrong
place.  They can get what they need from America Online or
Prodigy.

>I am proposing that this behavior stop, and that we make more
>of an effort to consider the unwillingly ignorant.

Who's tying your hands?  If you want to make it
easier for people to participate, write a newsreader
that pops up a special window, rings bells, and
prints out a long explanation every time the letters
"CFV" pop up in a subject line.  But please stop whining,
trying to get other people to do something you care about
more and are perfectly capable of doing yourself.

>>Nobody but you, Dave, cares about excusing ignorance.
>
>I care about educating ignorance. 

Then shut up and do it.  News.groups is the wrong audience.
--

    Chuck Karish          karish@mindcraft.com
    (415) 323-9000 x117   karish@pangea.stanford.edu
Xref: sparky news.groups:22437 news.admin.policy:481
From: cudep@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Usenet Documentation Revision Project : Update (Phase Zero completed)
Date: 19 Nov 1992 11:47:25 -0000
Organization: Team Limpid's Meathead With Aptitude - Kunst und Wahnsinn
NNTP-Posting-Host: spatula.csv.warwick.ac.uk

In article <1992Nov17.200624.5463@muddcs.claremont.edu> irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith) writes:
>The Interested People List presently includes:
> [list deleted]
>If I've missed anyone, drop me e-mail and let me know.

You've missed out BIFF and John Palmer!
How can a project like this succeed without the distilled net.wisdom
of these long timers?

BTW, :-)

Cheers,
-- 
\/ato - Ian Dickinson - NIC handle: ID17                   No-one is to molest
vato@csv.warwick.ac.uk  ...!mcsun!uknet!warwick!vato           the wombat when
/I=I/S=Dickinson/OU=CSV/O=Warwick/PRMD=UK.AC/ADMD= /C=GB/            anyone is
@c=GB@o=University of Warwick@ou=Computing Services@cn=Ian Dickinson  watching.
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: RFD: Should rec.music.makers.synth stand as a group name?
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
	<1992Nov15.115845.10766@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
	<1992Nov16.195105.11206@bagend.uucp>
	<1992Nov17.231314.16493@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:52:49 GMT

jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) writes:

   RFDs are preliminaries to votes for newsgroup creation, *not*
   smokescreens for a revote on a newsgroup that has passed the
   process.  If this proposed vote is allowed, it would be a _revote_.

In article <1992Nov17.231314.16493@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:

   It is not a revote. It is a newsgroup creation request worded in a
   different way.

A newsgroup creation request would create r.m.synth if two-thirds
approve of the new group /and/ at least 100 more approve than
disapprove.

The proposal on the table would create r.m.synth if /either/ one-third
of the voters approved, /or/ at most 99 more disapprove than approve.

In other words, the proposal on the table creates a new group if a
minority approve the action.
-- 
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: randall-joshua@yale.edu (Joshua Randall)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.misc,alt.adoption,misc.kids,soc.roots
Subject: Re: RFD/CFD: soc.adoption
Date: 19 Nov 1992 21:19:50 -0500
Organization: Yale University Science & Engineering UNIX(tm), New Haven, CT 06520-2158
NNTP-Posting-Host: minerva.cis.yale.edu
Keywords: adoption

In article <BxzJL2.KB9@world.std.com> leebeau@world.std.com (Lee A Beaudette) writes:
>In article <1992Nov19.210102.2029@sunova.ssc.gov> pamela@sscux1.ssc.gov (pamela gurd) writes:
>>
>>Yes - please create soc.adoption so that more sites can carry it.
>>
>>	Pam.
>
>Add another YES YES.

Could both of you say *why* you think this group should be created?

Also, I agree with an earlier poster:  this "RFD" does not follow the guilde-
lines.  Scrap it, see if there's really any interest, and if so, start over.

-- 
Joshua E. Randall                       randall-joshua@yale.edu
From: ksdavis@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Karleenus Schwartz Davis)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Intentional ignorance of newsgroup creation? (was Re: *BAD*...)
Date: 15 Nov 92 19:59:55 GMT
Organization: Indiana University

arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>
>It's not just that the subject doesn't give them notice, it's that the
>subject _selectively_ gives notice.

This is assuming that there is an intended audience.  Is there?  The
voter population can't be "skewed" unless there's an intended "ideal"
voter turnout.  I do recognise the argument made long ago that the
people who somewhere inside felt that r.m.s belongs under r.m.makers.*
might be more likely to catch a message with r.m.makers.* in the title
than those who deep inside feel that it would never fit there, and
therefore the turnout might lean toward support, because those for
whom the idea is unfathomable may have skipped that message in a rush.
(Once again, I believe that it was unintentional if it happened at all)
But to apply this argument, one must first assume that there is an
intended voter population.  If there is, what is it?  Where did this
idea of the ideal voter population come from?  How can it be enforced?

-sz
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: nahmed@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (NAWAZ AHMED)
Subject: Re: The Moderator of SRI is PREJUDICE!
Followup-To: news.groups,soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.bangladesh
Organization: northwestern university
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 23:18:15 GMT

In article <1enqp2INNhgd@gap.caltech.edu>, majafri@cco.caltech.edu (Mansoor
 A. Jafri) wrote:
		
> 		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 ?

Mr Jafri is writing plain lie when he says he does not know who Basalat
Raja is:
Mr Mansoor Jafri Lied to David Lawerence also about his not being involved
in any kind of activity and being completely a neutral person.

FACTS:

Mr. Mansoo Jafri and Mr. Asim Mughal (moderator of S.R.Islam) are both
moderators of "MUSLIM NETWORK NEWS:  A Mailing list : This mailing List is
a moderated forum dedicated to educate network communities on issues
relating to Islam. Submissions are compiled in the form of a news letter
and mailed to the subscribers. Mr Mansoor Jafri is a moderator alongwith
Asim mughal for this mailing list. The same mailing list was mwentioned in
Me. Saggaf's post to incite people to vote NO against proposed group
S.R.I.A. 

This clearly proves unethical conduct of moderators of Islam mailing Lists
and other Muslim activists like mr. Saggaf. How bold Mr. Mansoo Jafri is to
tel lies and claim He posted CFV at his own. Why Mr. Jafri had to do it. He
could have simply pointed out that CFV by Rana is not Legal or sought
clarification. Mr. Mansoor Jafri is telling more lies to cover his malious
acts.

NAWAZ AHMED
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY

Xref: sparky news.groups:21947 rec.games.frp.dnd:6269 rec.games.frp.misc:8405 rec.games.frp.advocacy:3212
From: cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.games.frp.dnd,rec.games.frp.misc,rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: rec.games.frp.campaign -- UNMODERATED
Date: 13 Nov 92 14:25:41 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: University of Waterloo

Please note that effective immediately, rec.games.frp.campaign should be
considered unmoderated.  This change is due to the opinions of several 
people that it is impossible to carry on a discussion about campaigns
in a moderated newsgroup, and campaign discusion is one of the primary
purpose of r.g.f.campaign.

For those of you who have already participated in the "Straw Vote" for
campaign, I appologize.  If you wish to retract your support, I will
remove you from the support list.  Contrarily, if you now wish to 
support .campaign, netmail me and I will add you to the list.
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.ai.neural-nets
From: erik@maui.til.com (Erik Horstkotte)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.ai.fuzzy
Organization: Togai InfraLogic, Inc.
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:06:55 GMT

In article <1992Nov14.130419.7586@maths.tcd.ie>, creilly@maths.tcd.ie (Colman Reilly) writes:

|> Or perhaps comp.fuzzy and sci.(math.?)fuzzy? THe comp for computer
|> applicatios and the sci for theoretical discussions.

I think that we can only justify a single newsgroup at the moment.
The traffic just isn't there for more than one - yet.  Nothing says
we can't do sci.logic.fuzzy now, and later split it into something
like: sci.logic.fuzzy.theory, sci.logic.fuzzy.apps, etc.
-- 
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,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: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 08:44:28 GMT

chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>HA!! Yeah RIGHT. Define "clear style of expression" and "rational opinions".
>Clear: Easy to understand -- i.e. without run-on sentences, bizarre
>formatting, ALL UPPER CASE, single huge paragraphs, etc.

But Gee Mr Chip! I can understand people when they do that. Are you implying
elitism again? After all, you yourself defined it as a distinction by
diploma...and that extends easily to "command of the written word". 

>Rational: Based on reasoning from verifiable, or at least plausible,
>assumptions; expressed without ad-hominem arguments and with emotions
>under control.

So what is the test for rationality?

>That some choose not to enter does not imply that the door is closed.

If the choice is influenced by atmosphere, then that is an effective door.
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

A man had lost a ring. His friend stopped by that morning and offered to help.
By late-afternoon, his friend remarked "I don't see it anywhere. Are you sure 
you lost your ring here?"
"Oh no," replied the man, "I lost it in the room over there...but the room
is too dark. Here I can see better."
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
From: irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith)
Subject: Trouble regarding the s.r.i.a CFV
Originator: irilyth@fenris
Organization: HMC Academic Computing Services
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 07:19:56 GMT

It seems pretty clear at this point that two separate CFV's for the proposed
soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyaa were posted to news.announce.newgroups by David
Lawrence, one of them invalidating the other. It appears that the intended
vote-taker (Rana) posted a bogus CFV to news.groups, which prompted someone
else (Jafri) to submit a proper CFV to David Lawrence (naming himself as
vote-taker), which was followed by another properly submitted CFV from the
original vote-taker (Rana).

This is a distinct mess. Could David Lawrence please confirm that Rana's
properly submitted CFV is in fact the only valid CFV, or confirm that some
other CFV is the official CFV is some other CFV is? Please, do NOT follow up
to this article with comments about the multiple CFV's--everyone is welcome
to his or her opinions, but I would really like to hear from the only person
even remotely in authority on this subject.

As a more general question, is it in fact the case that anyone can submit a
CFV once the required discussion period following an RFD has passed? I would
have thought that trying to sabotage a vote in this way would be a fairly
infrequent occurrence, but it seems that a fair number of people think that
this is exactly what has happened here. I can't think of any way to insure
that only one "legitimate" CFV gets posted, mostly because I can't really
think of anyone to precisely define "legitimate". Perhaps a CFV only
legitimate if it is submitted by the originator of the RFD? I'm open to
suggestions here; the guidelines say nothing, or rather, seem to say that
anyone can submit a CFV, naming anyone as the vote-taker.

Comments on this last issue are welcomed.
-- 
Josh Smith, User Support Coordinator  ::  irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu
Harvey Mudd College, Claremont CA     ::  consult(std-disclaimer.pl).
"Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine, which I guess is why
several of us died of tuberculosis." -Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.visual-basic
From: Flint.Waters@uwyo.edu (Flint Waters)
Date: 17 Nov 92 08:25:49 MST
Distribution: news.groups,world
Organization: University of Wyoming
Keywords: Visual Basic RFD
Summary: Agree

In article <Bxty6L.3zI@uunet.uu.net> doug@cc.ysu.edu (Doug Sewell) writes:
>Subject: RFD: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.visual-basic
>From: doug@cc.ysu.edu (Doug Sewell)
>Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 22:23:09 GMT
>Proposed newsgroup name: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.visual-basic
>Status: unmoderated
>
>Charter: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.visual-basic is for discussion of
>programming with Microsoft's Visual Basic language/environment for the
>Microsoft Windows environment.  Crossposting to other newsgroups is appro-
>priate only where issues outside of Visual Basic for Windows are also
>involved.
>
>Rationale: Microsoft's Visual Basic for Windows has become a significant
>programming tool for Windows.  It combines an interactive programming
>environment, a Windows interface-building tool, and a BASIC dialect with
>sufficient structure and power to rival Pascal as a real software devel-
>opment language.  In addition, Visual Basic (VB) discussion has become
>a visible part of the comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.* newsgroups that
>exist now.
>
>The RFD period will run from the date of posting to Friday, December 11,
>1992.  If appropriate, a CFV will be posted shortly afterwards.  I will
>be managing the voting.  All discussion on this proposition shall be in
>news.groups.
>-- 
>Doug Sewell, Tech Support, Computer Center, Youngstown State University
>doug@cc.ysu.edu	   doug@ysub.bitnet	<internet>!cc.ysu.edu!doug
>
>cat core | uuencode bunny.dropping | mail jp@tygra.michigan.com


I agree that a forum should be made available for this topic.  The growth
in VB use dramatically demonstrates the need to pool and share information.

Xref: sparky news.groups:22217 soc.culture.indian:37340 soc.culture.pakistan:16814 soc.culture.bangladesh:6018
From: ahmed-shakil@cs.yale.edu (Shakil Waiz Ahmed)
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: CFV: soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya moderated
Date: 17 Nov 1992 17:12:47 -0500
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: curie.systemsy.cs.yale.edu


In article <BxvEBn.4Mu@ucunix.san.uc.edu>, bhatnagr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Raj Bhatnagar) writes:
> In article<1eb2oaINNngu@CURIE.SYSTEMSY.CS.YALE.EDU>(Shakil Waiz Ahmed) writes:

> >First you state that there *is* no contradiction and then you accuse
> >*me* of "obfuscatory reasoning?" :-) If you have an alternate
> >interpretation to present, then please do so, and address all the
> >verses I have referred to.  
> 
> I don't have to present a discussion of the verses to you. The issue
> I am talking about is of two groups, each claiming to be possessing
> a consistent and convincing (to themselves) interpretation, and one group
> trying to bully the other into submission. 

Raj, if you have something concrete to say about either side of the
argument, please do so.  Otherwise, you may want to leave that side of
the argument to the Ahmadis who actually know what is being argued
about and know of the verses in question, etc.  Making generic
statements like the ones you make without knowing what the issues
really are about does not look very impressive...

-- Shakil
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: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 08:28:44 GMT

nadeau@bcarh1ab.bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau) 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?

"What do you mean that the city is auctioning my property? I wasn't notified.
WHAT? I don't get a chance to complain?"

>Well, if you don't want people to take you seriously, you're doing a
>great job.  But I thought all this was about the great injustice done to
>the poor, oppressed, participants in r.m.s, not just an opportunity for
>you to act like a clown.

I never miss an opportunity for the latter. No issue is so serious that 
it can't be funny. As to the former, this *is* an injustice issue...but
looking at the backlash of news.admin.cadre.consensus I guess no matter
what happens the r.m.s people have lost anyway.

>Make up your mind - is this a serious issue, or a joke?

Both at once. It's a joke that I'd have to be in here arguing for the
very users that are the meat and potatoes of usenet, and it's seriously
funny that people have to use character defamation tactics to defend
obviously weak positions. 

My point was and is...go ahead...make my day...attack my character! Please!
If I get offended by it, then I need to learn a few things. If people mistake
the attacks for the real me, then they need to learn a few things. If people
laugh at it (like Scott Forbes is doing) and go on with their lives, then 
we ALL learn something.
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

   Merely doing good to the evil may be just like doing evil to the good.
From: sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Bob Sloane)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.boats.crew
Date: 19 Nov 92 16:13:29 CST
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <BxnGHu.FAK@uunet.uu.net>, gumby@spock.uucp (Danny Richman) writes:
>      It would be in the best interest to start the creation of rec.boats.crew
> and begin the discussion from here on out.

Perhaps rec.sport.crew would be a better name and more descriptive of
the topic.
-- 
USmail: Bob Sloane, University of Kansas Computer Center, Lawrence, KS, 66045
E-mail: sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu, sloane@ukanvax.bitnet, AT&T: (913)864-0444 
Xref: sparky news.groups:22136 news.admin.policy:420
From: dww@bnr.co.uk (David Wright)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Voting on the Ahmadiyya Newgroup
Date: 17 Nov 92 01:42:28 GMT
Organization: BNR Europe Limited, Harlow, UK
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.199.129.39

Having read most of the newsgroups discussion on this, and being copied on
some of the email between the parties concerned, it is my considered
opinion that the problems in the CFV process for this group are the result
of misunderstandings and mistakes.   "To err is human".  Please do not
attribute bad motives to actions which are honest mistakes.

Normally David Lawrence, the long-suffering moderator or
news.announce.newsgroups, catches problems with CFV's, including the
situation when two people both think they'll help by both submitting CFV's
for something.  Unfortunately in this case he is working extremely long
hours, is very tired, and was less careful than usual in checking the CFV's.
Hence the changing CFV's, which as some of you have said are confusing.

The best thing to do in the circumstances is to hold off for a few days then
start again.   I understand that arrangements are being made for a third
party, (who has no personal interest in the result either way), to count the
votes.

The delay may allow people to think again about the group name.   All
existing soc.religion.* newsgroups are 3-level groups.  For example, the
Quaker news group is called soc.religion.quaker, not
soc.religion.christian.quaker.  If the Ahmadiyya newsgroup was called
soc.religion.ahmadiyya, that would not imply it was or was not part of
Islam.    But it might well avoid a lot of negative votes from those who
think it against their beliefs to say that is was.   Surely this would
be the best result for those who simply want a news group to discusss their
own beliefs in?

Please forgive me if I have misunderstood some basis of Islam or Ahmadiyya;
I know little of either,  but am writing based on my experience of how votes
and issues tend to happen on Usenet.

I'll close with a signature that I'm fond of; I hope you will like it too,
even though it does not come from any religious writings, and I'm sure some
of you will disagree with it.  (I don't fully agree with it myself, in fact).

Regards,   David Wright BNR Europe, London Road, Harlow, Essex  CM17 9NA, UK
dww@bnr.co.uk <or> ...uunet!mcsun!uknet!stl!dww <or> PSI%234237100122::DWW
"Do not speak of what men deserve.  For we each of us deserve everything,
 every luxury that was ever piled in the tombs of the dead Kings, and we each
 of us deserve nothing, not a mouthfull of bread in hunger.   Have we not eaten
 while another starved?  Will you punish us for that?  Will you reward us for
 the virtue of starving while others ate?  No man earns punishment, no man
 earns reward.  Free your mind of the idea of *deserving*, of *earning*, and
 you will begin to be able to think."
                            Odo, The Prison Letters (U.LeGuin, The Dispossessed)