HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nik@csgi38.dcs.leeds.ac.uk (Nik Silver)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.abstract
Organization: School of Computer Studies, University of Leeds
Distribution: scs
Keywords: perfect-information deterministic strategic no-dice
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 10:10:52 GMT
X-Posted-From: csgi38.leeds.ac.uk
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <BtMLqM.4qy@uunet.uu.net>, neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (Neil Bowers) writes:
>This is a Request For Discussion on the creation of a newsgroup for
>abstract strategy and tactical games.
>
>Group Name
>----------
>
>	rec.games.abstract

Well, it looks like The Great Rec.Games.Strategic Debate has been cut off in
its prime. Well done to all those who entered the frey, but the question now
is: do people want to be able to discuss abstract games in their own
newsgroup? I think this is an excellent idea, and I look forward to the whole
games community supporting an expansion of our frontiers.

Vote in favour of rec.games.abstract as proposed, so that we can all enjoy
playing our games.

-- 
Nik Silver                     "You the owner of this place?"
                                 "Yep. I'm Red"
                               "Why d'they call you Red?"
                                 "It's short for Redwood. My surname's Wood."
                               "What's your first name?"
                                 "Bill."
                                                         --- from Midnight Run
From: shimkus@athena.cs.uga.edu (Peter Gambit)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7
Date: 4 Sep 92 13:45:30 GMT
Organization: Liberator Atlanta

In article <1992Sep4.123934.16535@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU writes:
>>I think what you actually *mean* - but aren't admitting for some reason - is
>>that you think Blake's 7's popularity will die out after a couple of years.
>>That's for a vote to decide.
>
>The show generates almost NO discussion. Why don't you try to discuss the
>show enough to represent a signifigant share of the traffic on
>rec.arts.tv, rec.arts.sf.tv or rec.arts.tv.uk? THEN consider a separate
>group.
>
>A specific group for a single TV show is basically a bad idea, YES there
>are exceptions to that but they represent far more established phenomena
>like Star Trek and Dr. Who. I never even heard of Blakes 7 before this
>discussion. When I searched for articles on the subject outside of
>news.groups I found MAYBE a dozen articles. A dozen articles does not a
>newsgroup make.
>
>-Geoff
>--
>geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU - Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business
>
>                         "Microsoft Word to Your Mother."
>                              - Computer Rap Geeks

Well, maybe one of the reasons that it has light traffic in your opinion is
no one can find the discussion in the first place.  And trust me, Blakes 7
is most certainly an institution comparable to Dr. Who and Star Trek.  In
fact, Blakes 7 had an avid following in the US before even being shown on
broadcast TV here.  As for discussion, let me assure you that once you get B7 
fans  on a roll, they will not stop. :)  I cannot count the number of letters I 
receive on the topic of B7 and its implication to future society alone.

The point in fact is that Blake's Seven is every bit as important and popular
as Blakes Seven and Dr. Who in its circle, and it deserves its own group 
*somewhere*, whether alt.tv.blakes7 or (preferably) rec.arts.blakes7.

Yours,
Peter Gambit
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.babylon5
Organization: Megadodo Publications, Light City, Ursa Minor Beta
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 17:25:23 GMT

mpdeffen@apgea.army.mil (Michael P. Deffendall <mpdeffen>) writes:

> I also belive that this group would be best served in the alt.tv.*
>hierarchy.

Well, since we don't have alt here, I'd have to voice my disapproval.
Still, I do not think it is time yet to consider a mainstream group for
this show.  If it goes to vote and fails, it will be another 6 months
before it can be brought up again, and there might be an actual demand
for it if it goes on the air within that time.

Basically, hold off until it actually gets on the air before trying to
create a mainstream group.  Rec.arts.startrek.* readers, instruct B5
posters to discuss the topic in rec.arts.sf.tv, as Babylon 5 is not Star
Trek discussion material.

>Deff
>mpdeffen@crdec6.apgea.army.mil

-- gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...)

///   ____   \\\  "Sorry, did I say something wrong?  Pardon me for
| |/ /    \ \| |   breathing, which I never do anyway so I don't even 
 \\_|\____/|_//    know why I bother to say it oh God I'm so depressed.
     \_)\\/        Here's another one of those self-satisfied doors.
       `-'         Life... don't talk to me about life...."
From: rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: CFD: comp.ai.genetic
Keywords: CFD, genetic algorithms, classifier systems
Date: 4 Sep 1992 15:18:25 GMT

In article <gin001.715604025@cdc835>, gin001@cdc835.cdc.polimi.it (Mauro Cicognini) writes:
> We would like to bring up the issue of creating a news group called
> 
> comp.ai.genetic
> 
> to host discussion on the following items:
>  - Genetic algorithms
>  - Classifier systems
> 
> that don't really fit in with neural-nets and tend to be submerged in the
> more general comp.ai group.
> We know that there may be not so many people that are into GAs and CSs, but
> we feel that is definitely going to be a hot issue in the near future.

If you don't have the traffic, you don't need a group. You should either:

1) Use comp.ai with descriptive subjects until you have enough traffic to
support your group.

2) Start a mailing list and when you get a substantial amount of traffic or
members of the list (approx. 100) then consider a news group.

It has been my experience that the idea that the existence of a narrowly
focused newsgroup will almost never generate traffic. The idea that if 
it's there, discussion will come does not tend to be true. Examples are:

	comp.lang.hermes
	comp.lang.idl-pwave
	comp.lang.modula3
	comp.lang.objective-c	
	comp.lang.vhdl

all of which have had so little traffic that they could have been covered in
comp.lang.misc. You will fin similar instances in rec.games and soc.culture.
-- 
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: fred_s@earwax.pei.com (Fred Scott)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.abstract
Keywords: perfect-information deterministic strategic no-dice
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:42:20 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Protocol Engines Incorporated

In article <1992Sep01.053212.9009@microsoft.com> bethmo@microsoft.com (Beth Moursund) writes:
>>The games we're interested in are (again, almost always) games of perfect
>>information, so why not rec.games.perfect-information?  Well first off,
>
>I'm surprised that no one has pointed out yet that 1830 and Civilization
>are both diceless games of perfect information.  :-)

This is not technically true in the case of Civilization, due to the order of
the commodity cards (e.g. iron and papyrus are shuffled together), which is
not known.  (With the first edition expansion set of cards, the difference is
actually important.)  Also, some groups consider "card counting", in order to
be able to predict when the disaster cards come up, to be bad form and
discourage it - that is to say it's knowledge which is not on the same level
as, for instance, knowing where all of your opponent`s chess men are on the
board.

In any case, I think the multi-player nature of Civ and the 1830 line of games
sort of adds another dimension to the game which is contrary to the spirit of
what the original poster was to trying to get across.

Fred
From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7
Date: 31 Aug 92 13:56:18 GMT
Reply-To: hades@Dartmouth.Edu
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Disclaimer: Personally, I really don't care who you think I speak for.
Moderator: Rec.Arts.Comics.Info

jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...) writes:

>In article <BtpH33.2KD@uunet.uu.net> ramsey@cua.edu (Betsy Ramsey) writes:
>>This is a Request For Discussion about a proposed new group
>>rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7, the purpose of which would be to discuss the
>>British science-fiction television show _BLAKES 7_.  Some preliminary
>>discussion has already taken place in rec.arts.tv.uk and alt.config.

>Yes!  Yes!  Yes!  Right now it's quite difficult for a Blake fan with limited
>net.time to keep up with the Blake discussions scattered over three or
>four groups.  Please let's centralize it!

    If you want to centralize the discussion of the show, I have no
problem with that. What I do have a problem with is a single television
show getting it's own mainstream newsgroup. There are just no guarantees
that a tv show will last longer than a couple of years and we have no
need for more dead weight in the mainstram hierarchies. Since there has
been preliminary discussion in alt.config I say continue it and create
alt.tv.blakes7.

--
-Hades (Brian V. Hughes) 
	    "Egads! These look like a women's fingerprints"
						   -- Durlock Holmes
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.international
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:07:45 GMT
Organization: Enea Data AB

Jyrki Kuoppala <jkp@cs.hut.fi> writes:
)This is a request for discussion regarding creation of an unmoderated
)newsgroup for discussing internation aspects of computers, computer
)software, telecommunications and so on.
)
)comp.international  Discussions on hardware & software in international use.
)
)Comp.international is a group for discussing design and use of
)computer hardware and software (and other material in the field of
)computing) around the world, ie. how to provide for differences in
)character sets, cultural environments, styles in writing dates,
)electrical and other requirements, legal requirements and so on.

Actually, I fail to see the need of this group when we have
comp.std.internat. So, OK, the perspective intended here is
broader than just standards, but comp.std.internat is seldom
an over-crowded place.
-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
"Recreation of source code from design documentation can be costly"
IEEE Std 1042/1987
From: JLM@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: Removal of Unused Newsgroups
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:34:03 GMT
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

In article <1992Sep2.171520.1@wharton.upenn.edu>, millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
says:
>
>I agree that such a procedure needs to be in place but there has to be
>some kind of use test for the newsgroup. Namely this should only be done
>to newsgroups that have <X posts per month over Y months. I'd go for
>something like X=20 and Y=6 myself.
>
>The other thing that would be nice is if newsgroups stayed dead once
>they were killed. Each rmgroup attempt only kills 50 or 60% of the sites
>with a certain newsgroup, and we need to get that proportion higher,
>like 95% or more.


 Brian Reid (reid@decwrl.dec.com) just posted his monthly
"TOP 40 GROUPS BY: PER-READER-COST
                   POPULARITY
                   TRAFFIC"

 Maybe we should all ask him to keep a similar list for
THE BOTTOM 40.  Such a list would provide ample guidelines
as to which groups are dead/unused and should subsequently
be considered for removal.

-- Jose L. Martinez --
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chungdan@leland.stanford.edu
Subject: [naming] inconsistent names
Reply-To: chungdan@leland.stanford.edu
Organization: Electronics For Imaging, Inc.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 21:11:44 GMT


     Grupoj en "Socio.Kulturo.*[stelo]" havas ne-mem-samajn nomojn,
ekzemple, "Hinda" kontrau' "Pakistano", "Korea" kontrau' "C^inlando".
Kial?

     Groups in "Society.Culture.*" have inconsistent names,
for example, "Indian" versus "Pakistan", "Korean" versus "China".
Why?

					*Zhong* Qi-Iao, Usono/U.S.A.
				 ||| \ /  /       /   |  \/   |  / / /  
				 |+|  X  /       <    |       |  \/     
				 --- / \ ---      \   |       |  --|
From: fred_s@earwax.pei.com (Fred Scott)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:24:18 GMT
Organization: Protocol Engines Incorporated

In article <1992Aug31.170122.21968@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> hades@Dartmouth.Edu writes:
>ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:
>
>>Hades> == Hades  <hades@coos.dartmouth.edu> 
>
>> Hades> There are just no guarantees that a tv show will last longer
>> Hades> than a couple of years and we have no need for more dead weight
>> Hades> in the mainstram hierarchies.
>
>>Given that the show's already dead, the argument that there won't be
>>traffic after it dies doesn't hold a whole lot of water.
>
>    I realize this, but I was speaking in a general manner. The fact
>that the particular show we are talking about is already dead means this
>group really shouldn't be created, IMHO.

By that logic, rec.arts.star_trek shouldn't be have been created either.  I
guess a lot people probably disagree with you about that.

I think what you actually *mean* - but aren't admitting for some reason - is
that you think Blake's 7's popularity will die out after a couple of years.
That's for a vote to decide.

Fred
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: d-lewart@uiuc.edu (Daniel S. Lewart)
Subject: Gateway for USENET <--> Internet Mailing List
Originator: dslg0849@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Reply-To: d-lewart@uiuc.edu (Daniel S. Lewart)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 08:06:58 GMT

How can a bidirectional gateway be set up between an Internet mailing
list and a USENET newsgroup?  Also, is there a unidirectional gateway
which forwards email to an arbitrary newsgroup?  I looked through
about 10 FAQ files before posting this note.  Where is this information
available?

Thank you,
Daniel Lewart
d-lewart@uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Subject: Re: Vote change?
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 17:10:33 GMT

In article <Bu1vtG.968@news.cso.uiuc.edu> d-lewart@uiuc.edu (Daniel S. Lewart) writes:
>d-lewart@uiuc.edu (Daniel S. Lewart) writes:
>
>> I am running a CFV for a new newsgroup.  One person voted "No" and made
>> a comment.  I replied to the comment.  Now, that person would like to
>> change their vote to "Yes".  Is this okay?
>
>Anonymous 1 replies:
>
>> No. It is ok for someone to change their vote, of course, but not
>> for the vote taker to attempt to convince them to do so. Replying to
>> no votes is not proper behaviour for the vote taker.

No, this was not sent to you anonymously. I know, because I sent it. If
it had been anonymous, how could you have sent me mail asking if you
could quote it? (I shall leave as a parenthetical comment that you were
not granted permission to do so.)

I would like to make one change in the statement you quoted. I should
have said "Replying to ANY vote (other than a simple ack) is not proper
behavior...".

>I made no attempt to convince the voter to change their vote.  However,
>to avoid controversy, I will leave the vote as a "No".  I think this
>should be spelled out in "GUIDELINES FOR USENET GROUP CREATION".

Sadly, you are already in it. From your description of the situation,
you DID convince someone to change their no vote by discussing their no
vote with them. Whether you intended to or not doesn't matter much.

Now you say that you will disenfranchise that person because of your
mistake. Two wrongs do not make a right.

I hope for the sake of whatever group you want to create that the
numbers come out so much in favor that this indiscretion won't color
the result. On the other hand, can this one slide by after everyone
held Alok's feet to the fire for his actions? Is it worse for a vote
taker to reply to no votes or to say "I hope you vote yes" to a mailing
list?

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7
Date: 31 Aug 92 18:31:29 GMT
Reply-To: hades@Dartmouth.Edu
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Disclaimer: Personally, I really don't care who you think I speak for.
Moderator: Rec.Arts.Comics.Info

sll28@cc.usu.edu (Lorna Payne) writes:

>While I don't have any problem with and alt. group per se, the objection
>that several people have had is that distribution of alt. groups is
>limited, particularly if they are bogus groups (e.g., alt.tv.mst3k).
>Because of this, if an alt. group is created, then all those people
>who don't get it will continue to discuss Blakes 7 on each of the three
>or four groups where discussion goes on now--meaning that people who
>*do* get the alt. groups will just have to follow another group.  The
>only remedy for this that I can think of is to crosspost 100% of
>alt.tv.blakes7 to rec.arts.sf.tv, which defeats the purpose of having
>a Blakes 7 group in the first place.

    If this is the case then somone needs to tell people that the
appropriate place to discuss Balkes 7 is on rec.arts.sf.tv. It's not
like that group has tons of traffic as it is, and a continuous stream of
Blakes 7 posts might be good for the group as a whole. I personally
can't believe that there is so much Balkes 7 traffic that it warrants
it's own newsgroup, alt.* or otherwise. But if a group were to be
created then, IMHO, alt.tv.* is the place for it. Especially since I
seriously doubt it would pass a CFV. None of the other ones have.

--
-Hades (Brian V. Hughes) 
	    "Egads! These look like a women's fingerprints"
						   -- Durlock Holmes
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7
Organization: Megadodo Publications, Light City, Ursa Minor Beta
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 06:57:34 GMT

neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Postlethwaite) writes:
>ramsey@cua.edu (Betsy Ramsey) writes:

>>This is a Request For Discussion about a proposed new group
>>rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7, the purpose of which would be to discuss the
>>British science-fiction television show _BLAKES 7_.  Some preliminary
>>discussion has already taken place in rec.arts.tv.uk and alt.config.

>why not just plain rec.arts.blakes7 like Star Trek is rec.arts.startrek

Because rec.arts.startrek is mis-named.  Rec.arts.sf.blakes7 isn't that
great of a name, as it is entirely a TV show, and the name should
reflect that.

Star Trek is sf, and should be in rec.arts.sf.*.  Unfortunately it has
become a hierarchy of rec.arts.startrek.*, making it much more difficult
to get that error corrected.

R.a.startrek may not be broken, but it is now trying to break other
groups trying to put themselves in their proper locations in the net.
(No, this is not an attempt to call for its relocation now.)

>Or alt.tv.blakes7 similar to alt.tv.red-dwarf or alt.tv.twin-peaks

Maybe if it fails its r.a.sf.tv.blakes7 location.  It wouldn't hurt to
try.

-- gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...)

///   ____   \\\  "Sorry, did I say something wrong?  Pardon me for
| |/ /    \ \| |   breathing, which I never do anyway so I don't even 
 \\_|\____/|_//    know why I bother to say it oh God I'm so depressed.
     \_)\\/        Here's another one of those self-satisfied doors.
       `-'         Life... don't talk to me about life...."
From: JLM@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: Removal of Unused Newsgroups
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:13:28 GMT
 <14491@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> <1992Sep2.174509.10697@unlinfo.unl.edu>
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

In article <1992Sep2.174509.10697@unlinfo.unl.edu>, gberigan@cse.unl.edu
(Life...) says:
>
>How about this:
>
>       2/3 (67%) of voters must vote YES/RM to kill the group, else kept
>
>       100 votes of NO/KEEP will save the group, regardless of 2/3 above
>
>That makes it reasonably difficult, and it does bear some resemblance to
>the current method of creating groups.


 It was my understanding after reading the RFD, that this discussion
was about finding a procedure for removing *UNUSED GROUPS* which sit
there month after month with maybe one or two posts, or none.

 Yet most of the follow-ups seem to be talking about the removal of
"unpopular" groups. Why ????????

 Anyway, the "100 votes of NO/KEEP" suggestion in order to save a group
from removal is not the answer either. It could be used against small, yet
*relatively* active groups.

 If the discussion is about removal of dead/unused/hardly-ever-used groups,
then I support the simple 2/3 majority idea.

 If the discussion now tries to deal with the issue of *unpopular* groups,
then none of the suggestions that have been made are any good.

-- Jose L. Martinez --
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dennisp@kpc.com (Dennis Preston)
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.legal.family moderated
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Inc, Santa Clara, CA
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 21:35:37 GMT

Please !! This group is why I started lurking on the Net!

 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: os9ug@gkcl.ists.ca (OS-9 User Group)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.abstract
Keywords: perfect-information deterministic strategic no-dice
Date: 27 Aug 92 21:16:26 GMT
Reply-To: os9ug@gkcl.UUCP (OS-9 User Group)
Organization: y

In article <1992Aug27.185304.14443@riacs.edu> nicholso@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Melvin H. Nicholson YBH) writes:
>>This is a Request For Discussion on the creation of a newsgroup for
>>abstract strategy and tactical games.
>[lots deleted]

>Without exception, the entire charter of this group governs a subset of
>the material for rec.games.board.  The group r.g.b has a reletively low
>bandwidth, and has often discussed games on the above list --- never

Actually I was impressed by the extent to which the proposal deviated
from the aims and goals of rec.games.board -- 

ie: The extent to which discussion of computing aspects of these
abstract games will enter into the group, and such.

Furthermore, over the last few days rec.games.board has been getting
some 40+ messages a day, so I hardly would call it low volume.

It seems to me that this group is culling a large number of threads from
a large number of newsgroups, and putting them all together in one
useful place.  I invite you to spend some time reading the newsgroups
that the RFD was posted to, and examine for yourself the extent to
which your statement above is false.

Justin Wells
sizone!justin@ee.ryerson.ca (Justin)
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.games.abstract
Date: 27 Aug 92 22:42:08 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <1992Aug27.204011.19979@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, by neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (Neil Bowers):
>>> I surprised you don't recommend everything be posted to rec.games,

>>But then the volume would be too high.
 
> Did you notice the following lines after that paragraph?
[...]
> I.e. I'm joking, don't bother to follow up.

I did.  It was no bother to follow up.

 	[note for the humor impaired: feel free to insert a liberal amount of
 	smilies in the above paragraph]



-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
From: kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Chris Dollin)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 07:51:46 GMT
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.lang.pop
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.