HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: alan@auntbea.austin.ibm.com (Alan R. Weiss)
Subject: Re: City Council & CO Ammendment 2
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 13:58:31 GMT
Organization: (speaking only for myself from Austin, Texas)

In article <PETONIC.92Dec18105850@daisy.hal.com> petonic@hal.com (Michael A. Petonic) writes:
>In article <SCANNON.46.724686473@novell.com> SCANNON@novell.com (Steve Cannon) writes:
>>What is your opinion on the Austin City Council approving unanimously the 
>>city's boycott the State of Colorado?  
>>
>>I'm not trying to start a flame war, but merely interested in others' views 
>>on the matter.
>>
>>Be kind! :-)
>
>Since I get the NYTimes instead of the local paper, I'm wasn't aware
>of this.  Anyway, I think it's a good-thing[tm].  But of course,
>that's just because I'm in favor of boycotting Colorado.  If I didn't
>feel that a boycott of Colorado was a good-thing[tm] for private
>citizens, I certainly wouldn't feel it to be appropriate for a City
>council.
>
>-pet-
>--
>Michael A. Petonic	       petonic@hal.com		       +1-512-794-2855
>        HaL Computer Systems International, Ltd. -- A Bermuda Corporation
>             Director of Dangerous Activities  [ACK to Geoff.Kimbrough@sun.com]
>				 Austin, Texas
>                          "No balls, no blue chip."


I've been thinking about this, and talked to my folks (who live
in Littleton, just outside of Denver).  They pointed out that
Denver, Aspen, and Boulder specifically had anti-discrimination
laws that were overturned in the recent election, and they are
in court trying to get the new law overturned on constitutional
grounds.  The voters in these three cities *rejected* Colorado
Amendment 2.

A boycott of Colorado in general sends a strong signal to the State,
to be sure, but for these three cities, it's preaching to the choir.

On the other hand, its not clear to me *what* a concerned citizen
could do to express their displeasure - and certainly a boycott is
an appropriate and potent economic weapon.  That the City Council
of Austin made this statement on moral grounds is much to its credit.
However, if Max and Louise and Ronny and Bob and Gus and Charles and
(so who's the seventh?) are traveling to Colorado for ANYTHING
on business, something's wrong - and in fact, they *weren't* planning
on going, anyway.  This is just symbolic.  IMHO.
-- 
   _  Alan R. Weiss   IBM AWS Austin-AIX Kernel   11501 Burnet Rd, Bld 905
 _| ~-. alan%auntbea.austin.ibm.com@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com | Austin, TX 78758
 \, *_} auntbea.austin.ibm.com!alan@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com | 512-838-8281
   \(   DISCLAIMER:  Working at, not speaking for, IBM  | alan@auntbea
From: dhs@cs.utexas.edu (Douglas H. Steves)
Newsgroups: austin.talk
Subject: Re: Cable Rates going up.
Date: 31 Dec 1992 12:42:48 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
Distribution: austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: abyssinian.cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Dec28.210440.28719@wixer.cactus.org> reaper@wixer.cactus.org (Keath Milligan) writes:
>In article <1992Dec22.202206.4566@mcc.com> amck@rowdy.mcc.com (Alan McKendree) writes:
>>In article <Bzo81B.2sGK@austin.ibm.com> dewey@vpdbox.austin.ibm.com writes:
>>>Maybe we could organize a mass boycott of Austin Cablevision
>>Sure, threaten them with mass destruction if they don't give you what
>>you want, when you want it, at the price you want to pay.
>I don't think I share your opinion, Alan.  ACV has been giving Austin
>sub-standard service at premium rates for way too long.

Agreed.

>Unfortunately boycotts never seem to do much good unless you put about as
>much money into promoting the boycott as you hope to save through that which
>the boycott is to accomplish.

Also agreed.
The only real solution is competition.
DirecTV (the Hughes/Thomson satellite venture) should be on the air
in late '93. Assuming that most homeowners can install a 20" flat dish,
we should start seeing improvements at ACV in early '94.

Doug


Newsgroups: austin.talk
From: amck@rowdy.mcc.com (Alan McKendree)
Subject: Re: Cable Rates going up.
Organization: MCC, Austin, Texas
Distribution: austin
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:22:06 GMT

In article <Bzo81B.2sGK@austin.ibm.com> dewey@vpdbox.austin.ibm.com writes:
>
>		CABLE RATES ARE GOING UP:
>   Some cable TV companies are hitting customers with steep price
>hikes four months before action on a law designed to hold rates
>down. Most of the nations' 11,000 cable systems are expected to
>raise monthly rates for 1993. And most of the announced increases
>exceed inflation - now about 3% annually. The National Cable
>Television Association says increases nationwide average about 6%.

Are you surprised by this?  If the National Association of Employers
got the government to freeze programmer's salaries, don't you think
many would do everything they could to maximize their salaries before
the freeze?  Just one of those nasty little side effects of
regulation.

And BTW, who ever said the rate of inflation was or should be the
upper limit of price increases?  Outside the ex-USSR, that is.

>======================================================================
>Maybe we could organize a mass boycott of Austin Cablevision, ie get
>500-1000 people to all agree to cancel the cable on February first if
>they don't lower the cost, Carry the Sci-Fi and Cartoon channel, upgrade
>their equipment for more channels.
>Who's game?
>---

Sure, threaten them with mass destruction if they don't give you what
you want, when you want it, at the price you want to pay.  Why not
just get the government to nationalize all cable stations outright?
(Although you'd still have to get on the board of directors to assure
yourself of the programs you want to see.)

No wonder you want the Cartoon Channel.  You babies.

-- 
Alan McKendree          Opinions posted by me are mine, only.
amck@rowdy.mcc.com         Who/Little Feat/racquetball/Rand
Newsgroups: austin.talk
From: curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806)
Subject: Re: Cable Rates going up.
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 03:54:23 GMT
Distribution: austin
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin

is cable max any good?

-- 
curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to my employer's    |        Austin, TX
 - Begin means testing of Social Security, Medicare and Farm Subsidies now. -
From: rrt@mpd.tandem.com (Robert Teisberg)
Newsgroups: austin.talk
Subject: Re: Cable Rates going up.
Date: 23 Dec 92 19:27:35 GMT
Reply-To: rrt@amadeus.UUCP (Robert Teisberg)
Distribution: austin
Organization: /etc/organization

In article <1992Dec22.202206.4566@mcc.com> amck@rowdy.mcc.com (Alan McKendree) writes:
>In article <Bzo81B.2sGK@austin.ibm.com> dewey@vpdbox.austin.ibm.com writes:
>>	[Let's boycott Austin Cablevision]
>
>Sure, threaten them with mass destruction if they don't give you what
>you want, when you want it, at the price you want to pay.  Why not
>just get the government to nationalize all cable stations outright?
>(Although you'd still have to get on the board of directors to assure
>yourself of the programs you want to see.)

Oh, come on!  How many times have people said, "If you don't like
[your favorite threat to civilization as we know it], don't do
business with companies that do that"?  The boycott dewey proposes
would destroy Austin Cablevision only if: (a) enough subscribers
participate to make the company unprofitable, and (b) the management
is unable or unwilling to offer the services its customers want at a
price they are willing to pay.  If that's the case, the company ought
to go under because it's not offering a sufficiently valuable service
or product.

What went wrong with cable service in this country is that the Federal
government allowed local governments to create monopolies on cable
service but took away their right to regulate them.  With neither
competition nor regulation, only corporate altruism (fat chance!) or
fear of renewed government interference (which is what the have now
ended up with) could have prevented the cable companies from screwing
their consumers.  A boycott is the only weapon consumers have left:
"If you won't give me the services that I want at a price I'm willing
to pay, I won't give you any money at all.  I recognize that I am
thereby depriving myself of other services that you do offer."  What's
wrong with that?

-- 
Bob Teisberg @ Tandem Computers, Inc. | rrt@mpd.tandem.com
14231 Tandem Blvd.                    | (512) 244-8119
Austin, Texas  78728                  |
Jimmy and I have a deal.  Jimmy doesn't hack code; I don't speak for Tandem.
From: stecz@pencom.com (John Steczkowski)
Newsgroups: austin.talk
Subject: Re: speed traps in Austin
Date: 21 Dec 92 16:45:50 GMT
Reply-To: stecz@pencom.com
Distribution: austin
Organization: Pencom Software

In article <BzDK8I.tro@austin.ibm.com> repass@austin.ibm.com (Jim Repass)  
writes:
> 
> In article <1992Dec16.154221.1269@pencom.com>, stecz@pencom.com (John  
Steczkowski) writes:
> > In article <SCANNON.42.724340533@novell.com> SCANNON@novell.com (Steve  
Cannon)  
> > writes:
> > > What's the need to speed in the first place?  :)
> > 
> > It depends...On city streets I drive at the prevailing traffic speeds,  
don't  
> > change lanes excessively, etc.  On highways, I drive at whatever speed is  
> > comfortable and safe for conditions.  Case in point.  This weekend, I drove  
to  
> > Dallas (Reunion arena).  From my house in Cedar Park, it is just under 200  
> > miles.  On the way there (Saturday, starting at 7:30am).  I made it to  
Reunion  
> > arena in 2.25 hours.  As an experiment (and the weather was bad, I drove  
home  
> 
> Average speed >88 Miles per hour?

sounds about right.
> 
> > with my cruise control set on precisely 65mph).  It took me 3.5 hours.  So,  
by  
> 
> Average speed 57 Miles per Hour?
> 
> Does this mean that on the way up you actually were going over 90 MPH?
> Or does it mean that on the way down you stopped for dinner?

On the way up, I was going about 90, no stops, didn't have to shup off cruise  
control except once or twice for slower traffic.  On the way home, I went 55 in  
the 55mph sections, and 65 in the 65 mph sections, I also made a potty stop and  
had to shut the cruise control off a couple of times for traffic merging on  
highway.  So those speeds sound about right.

--
  John Steczkowski                        stecz@pencom.com
  "Achilles raised his spear, took careful aim, and hurled."
  					    from the Iliad
From: esm@june.che.utexas.edu (Edward Scott Meadows)
Newsgroups: austin.talk
Subject: Re: City Council & CO Ammendment 2
Date: 29 Dec 92 18:42:15 GMT
Organization: UT Department of Chemical Engineering

In article <85754@ut-emx.uucp> swinnea@cunningham.che.utexas.edu (J. Steven Swinnea) writes:
>In article <BzM45J.2E14@austin.ibm.com> alan@auntbea.austin.ibm.com (Alan R. Weiss) writes:
>
>>However, if Max and Louise and Ronny and Bob and Gus and Charles and
>>(so who's the seventh?) are traveling to Colorado for ANYTHING
>>on business, something's wrong - and in fact, they *weren't* planning
>>on going, anyway.  This is just symbolic.  IMHO.
>
>So what about the *Mayor's* conference scheduled for Denver?  It would
>seem to me that Bruce (the seventh) might have been going to that.
>
>Steve Swinnea
>

Steve, mayor Todd will not be able to attend without either 1) the
City Manager's certification that the travel is essential to the
welfare of Austin; or 2) an act of council that exempts his travel
plans from the resolution.



-- 
Edward S. Meadows
Department of Chemical Engineering
University of Texas
Austin TX 78721-1062
Newsgroups: austin.talk
From: mwiz@cia.austin.ibm.com (Marc Wiz)
Subject: Re: Cable Rates going up.
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:17:47 GMT
Distribution: austin
Organization: IBM, Austin

In article <Bzo81B.2sGK@austin.ibm.com> dewey@vpdbox.austin.ibm.com writes:
>
>		CABLE RATES ARE GOING UP:
>   Some cable TV companies are hitting customers with steep price
>hikes four months before action on a law designed to hold rates
>down. Most of the nations' 11,000 cable systems are expected to
>raise monthly rates for 1993. And most of the announced increases
>exceed inflation - now about 3% annually. The National Cable
>Television Association says increases nationwide average about 6%.
>
>======================================================================
>Maybe we could organize a mass boycott of Austin Cablevision, ie get
>500-1000 people to all agree to cancel the cable on February first if
>they don't lower the cost, Carry the Sci-Fi and Cartoon channel, upgrade
>their equipment for more channels.
>

>Who's game?

There is a problem with this.  Some of us live in areas where we have
to have cable.  I live in Buttercup Creek in Cedar Park and the deed
restrictions include no external antennas.  This forces us to have
cable.

I have heard that cable companies offer to install the cabling into a
subdivision if builders will put an antenna restriction into the deed
restrictions.  I have a problem with this in general since it restricts
my ham radio activities since it really is aimed at tv antennas.  But I
bought the house with full knowledge of the deed restriction.

What really frosts me is that everytime we have a storm the FM goes out
and then the tv signal.  This is cable.  Whatever happened to a better
picture?

>Course we should start with KBVO and get them to start broadcasting in
>stereo... ;-)
>

At least DS9 will be on a channel with stereo.


Marc

mwiz@eureka.austin.ibm.com
(512)823-9330

I speak only for myself.
Newsgroups: austin.talk
From: jfh@rpp386 (John F. Haugh II)
Subject: Re: Cable Rates going up.
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: Los Tejanos SCUBA Club and Beer Joint, Austin, Tejas
Distribution: austin
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 17:15:11 GMT

In article <Bzpx5n.1IKo@austin.ibm.com> mwiz@cia.austin.ibm.com (Marc Wiz) writes:
>There is a problem with this.  Some of us live in areas where we have
>to have cable.  I live in Buttercup Creek in Cedar Park and the deed
>restrictions include no external antennas.  This forces us to have
>cable.

Shame on you.  Certainly you know that the opposite of external
antenna is not "no antenna".  TeeVee signals do go through shingles
and plywood, and with any luck you could put a small collection of
antennas inside your attic.  Based on descriptions of you house,
you should have enough volume up there to accomodate quite a mess
of wiring.  If your roof was framed to support itself (that is, you
don't have a low pitch roof that is propped up by the ceiling of
your house, or you didn't have idiots for builders ...) you might
even have enough room to put an antenna on one of those rotator
gadgets ...
-- 
John F. Haugh II                  [  TSAKC  ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151           [ DoF #17 ]        @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
From: swinnea@cunningham.che.utexas.edu (J. Steven Swinnea)
Newsgroups: austin.talk
Subject: Re: City Council & CO Ammendment 2
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:22:39 GMT
Organization: UT Department of Chemical Engineering

In article <BzM45J.2E14@austin.ibm.com> alan@auntbea.austin.ibm.com (Alan R. Weiss) writes:

>However, if Max and Louise and Ronny and Bob and Gus and Charles and
>(so who's the seventh?) are traveling to Colorado for ANYTHING
>on business, something's wrong - and in fact, they *weren't* planning
>on going, anyway.  This is just symbolic.  IMHO.

So what about the *Mayor's* conference scheduled for Denver?  It would
seem to me that Bruce (the seventh) might have been going to that.

Steve Swinnea
From: esm@june.che.utexas.edu (Edward Scott Meadows)
Newsgroups: austin.talk
Subject: Re: City Council & CO Ammendment 2
Date: 29 Dec 92 18:48:53 GMT
Organization: UT Department of Chemical Engineering

In article <jrh.2b392bdf-e@mustang.dell.com> jrh@mustang.dell.com (Randy Howard) writes:

>I'm doubtful that the State of Colorado will have much of a financial hit
>because of the Austin council actions.  I heard a talk radio show today that
>had the Colorada State Senate President on, and he indicated that they have
>yet to feel any economic effect, in fact, the resorts are all booked full.
>I think the media thinks it is important, but the vacationers seem to be 
>ignoring it.
>
>-- 
>Randy Howard            _o	    @'s: jrh@dell.com
>Dell Computer Corp.     \<,	    !'s: ...!uunet!dellunix!jrh
>______________________()/ ()______________________________________________


The Colorado offical is trying to minimize the boycott's effects by
lying to you.  Denver has lost conventions worth over $10 million so
far.  Colorado Springs has lost two small conventions and likely will
lose the Mayors' Conference as well.

Lotus Development and several other high-tech companies have announced
that they will not move into or expand existing facilities in Colorado
because of Amendment 2.

You're writing without command of the facts in this case. 

-- 
Edward S. Meadows
Department of Chemical Engineering
University of Texas
Austin TX 78721-1062
Xref: sparky austin.talk:417 tx.politics:8052
From: flatau@cs.utexas.edu (Arthur Flatau)
Newsgroups: austin.talk,tx.politics
Subject: Re: City Council & CO Ammendment 2
Date: 21 Dec 1992 11:40:36 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: im4u.cs.utexas.edu

In article <BzM45J.2E14@austin.ibm.com> alan@auntbea.austin.ibm.com (Alan R. Weiss) writes:
>[...]
>
>  That the City Council
>of Austin made this statement on moral grounds is much to its credit.
>However, if Max and Louise and Ronny and Bob and Gus and Charles and
>(so who's the seventh?) are traveling to Colorado for ANYTHING

The seventh is the mayor Bruce Todd.

>on business, something's wrong - and in fact, they *weren't* planning
>on going, anyway.  This is just symbolic.  IMHO.

I believe the ban applies to all city employees (traveling on city
business) not just the council.  It still is mostly symbolic.

Art
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Newsgroups: austin.talk
Subject: Self supporting roof (was Re: Cable Rates going up.
Date: 31 Dec 92 20:38:45 GMT
Distribution: austin
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin

In article <1992Dec25.171511.2585@rpp386> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>of wiring.  If your roof was framed to support itself (that is, you
>don't have a low pitch roof that is propped up by the ceiling of
>your house, or you didn't have idiots for builders ...) you might

Framed to support itself, how so?  Most every rafter I've seen looks
something like this:

          /\
        /   \
      /      \ 
    /\      / \
  /   \    /   \
/      \  /     \
-----------------

Are you talking about something like this:

          /\
        /   \
      /      \ 
    /---------\
  /            \
/               \
-----------------

Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner    Phone: 512/346-8380    MHS: bboerner@novell
Internet: bboerner@novell.com     \  Please use either if replying
   or  Brendan_Boerner@novell.com /  by mail exterior to Novell.
Newsgroups: austin.talk
From: jfh@rpp386 (John F. Haugh II)
Subject: Re: Self supporting roof (was Re: Cable Rates going up.
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: Los Tejanos SCUBA Club and Beer Joint, Austin, Tejas
Distribution: austin
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 18:57:44 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.203845.20309@novell.com> bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner) writes:
>Framed to support itself, how so?  Most every rafter I've seen looks
>something like this:

[ Framing deleted ... ]

>Are you talking about something like this:
>
>          /\
>        /   \
>      /      \ 
>    /---------\
>  /            \
>/               \
>-----------------

No, something more like

	/\
    || /  \
    ||/    \
    |/      \
    /        \
   ============  *
   |          | ***
   | +-+ +--+ | ***
   | +-+ |  | |  *
   | *** |  | |  |
====================

this ;-)

But seriously, you can build a roof with almost no internal cross-bracing.
The ceiling rafters (see my picture ;-) act as the cross-braces that are
usually required (triangles being more stable than rectangles and so on).
Usually the builder will erect a frame to hold up the ridge-pole and what
have you until the roof rafters are attached to it.  At that time you can
(and probably will - because that much wood isn't free or cheap) remove
all of the cribbing.

Cheaper homes are built with pre-framed trusses so they can get away with
using 2x4's.  But you lose your attic in the bargain.  Our rafters are 20'
long or so 2x6's or 2x8's (I could go measure if you care) with only a
few pieces of 2x4 at the apex.  Flatter pitched roofs (again, ours is
6x12 or 8x12) require internal framing because of the mechanics of that
low, wide "triangle" (being easier to "flatten" out), so you might see
this on 2 story homes where total height is a concern.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                  [ PGP 2.1 ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151           [ DoF #17 ]        @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
Xref: sparky austin.talk:421 tx.politics:8059
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Newsgroups: austin.talk,tx.politics
Subject: Re: City Council & CO Ammendment 2
Date: 22 Dec 92 14:16:47 GMT
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin

In article <1992Dec21.212801.13464@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu> conditt@tsd.arlut.utexas.edu (Paul Conditt) writes:
>judgements.  Aren't these the same people who want to stop development
>in the Barton Springs area, but would just *love* to move the airport
>out to Manor because some of them own land there that would suddenly
>become quite valuable?   Whether one agrees with the CO Ammendment or not,

No, they're the folks who are trying everything they can do to
encourage development in West Austin.  On these votes, the council
usually votes RULE-3 (Reynolds, Urdy, Larson, Epstein).

As for moving it to Manor, I'm not sure.

Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner		Phone: 512/346-8380
Internet: bboerner@novell.com	MHS: bboerner@novell
Please use ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if replying by mail exterior to Novell.
Newsgroups: austin.talk
From: lenny@icus.ICUS.COM (Lenny Tropiano)
Subject: UNIX trademark of Novell, Inc.
Organization: ICUS Software Systems, Austin, Texas
Distribution: austin
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 00:41:13 GMT

What does everyone know about the announcement?  Why would USL sell that
asset?  Did they get D. Ritchie and those folks?  

Barry Shein writes ...
"Announced today on the news, $350M, official announcement 2PM EST,
 Unix is a trademark of Novell, Inc."
"No idea what this portends for the suit against BSDI."


-- 
| Lenny Tropiano           ICUS Software Systems        lenny@icus.ICUS.COM |
|               ...!{cs.utexas.edu,ames,pacbell}!icus!lenny                 |
+-------------- 6905-B Argonne Forest Cove, Austin, TX 78759 ---------------+
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Newsgroups: austin.talk
Subject: Re: Cable Rates going up.
Date: 23 Dec 92 19:17:56 GMT
Distribution: austin
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin

In article <1992Dec22.202206.4566@mcc.com> amck@rowdy.mcc.com (Alan McKendree) writes:
>In article <Bzo81B.2sGK@austin.ibm.com> dewey@vpdbox.austin.ibm.com writes:
>>Maybe we could organize a mass boycott of Austin Cablevision, ie get
>>500-1000 people to all agree to cancel the cable on February first if
>>they don't lower the cost, Carry the Sci-Fi and Cartoon channel, upgrade
>>their equipment for more channels.
>>Who's game?

>Sure, threaten them with mass destruction if they don't give you what
>you want, when you want it, at the price you want to pay.  Why not
>just get the government to nationalize all cable stations outright?
>(Although you'd still have to get on the board of directors to assure
>yourself of the programs you want to see.)
>
>No wonder you want the Cartoon Channel.  You babies.

Hmmm, Dewey calls for a boycott and Alan starts yapping about
nationalizing the cable system.  Where'd I miss the transition?

Alan, a boycott is a perfectly valid method of affecting change in a
capitalistic society.  It's called voting with your dollars.

Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner		Phone: 512/346-8380
Internet: bboerner@novell.com	MHS: bboerner@novell
Please use ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if replying by mail exterior to Novell.