HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: why do we have no votes?
Date: 14 Apr 92 22:10:19 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

razer@smaug.hacks.arizona.edu (The Artful Dodger) writes:

>>I notice that soc.religion.mormon has failed.  I'm worried that this
>>failure is an abuse of the voting process.  As I understand it, the
>>purpose of voting is to make sure (1) that there is enough demand to
>>justify a group and (2) that the way it is implemented is appropriate,
>>e.g. whether it's moderated, what it's called, etc.  I'm concerned,
>>based both on the discussion here and on seeing who cast some of the
>>negative votes, that people voted against it because they dislike
>>Mormon ideas.  


>	I have to Agree here.  I'd be intrested in hearing from
>some of the people who voted no - what are your resons?  Does 
>anyone have any that don't boil down to spite?

I'm one of the people who voted no.  I'm also a person who "dislikes
mormond ideas."  The two are unrelated.  There are other religions
that I dislike but I've either voted yes or not voted on group 
creation.

The reason I voted no is that I considerd the proposed censorship of
the traffic to be offensive and not appropriate to be propogated 
using public and/or others' private resources including mine.
If the group were re-proposed without the offensive section, ie, any 
subject matter relevant to the religion is permitted, I'd
at least sit on my vote and might even vote yes.

This is just another case where the democratic process worked - The no vote
reflected the collective sense of the net.


John
-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC        | What's the difference between Jane Fonda
Rapid Deployment System, Inc. | and Bill Clinton?  Hanoi Jane went to 
Marietta, Ga                  | Viet Nam.              
jgd@dixie.com                 | Need public access in Atl?  Write me.
From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:28:59 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

limkiong@vms2.iscs.nus.sg (Twas brillig, and the slithy toves...) writes:

>In article <1992Apr7.145126.12954@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, wald@theory.lcs.mit.edu (David Wald) writes...
>>Because the uninformed will be voting on your newsgroup.  If you don't
>>take the opinions of the uninformed into account, they may vote
>>against your group.

>Unfortunately true. Else there wouldn't be a need for all these follow-ups.

    This is a very true statement. But this is the way UseNet works.

>>Given the discussion so far, I still fail to understand how creating
>>rec.arts.comics.manga would declare manga to be a subcategory of, less
>>important than, or morally inferior to American and British comics.

>Less important, morally inferior - of course not.

>Subcategory - if its one level of hierarchy below the newsgroup that discusses
>Western comics, what else can we infer? Isn't that the whole point of having
>hierarchies in the first place, so that subcategories can be grouped under
>a main category?

    This is not the way things are being done anymore. Sub-hierarchies
have come to represent something that is differnt that whay you have
stated above. Where the name of the hierarchy denotes the overall
subject material, and the subgroups are those parts of the matieral that
have enough support to have their own group. Take a look at any of the
large comp.sys.* hierarchies for really good examples of what I'm
talking about. The problme is that this trend hasn't, until just
recently, been used in the rec.* or rec.arts.* hierarchies. Many people
are of the mind that the success of the rec.arts.sf.* reorg (after a few
snags ;) is the beginning of this trend for rec.arts.*. The problem that
many people have is some kind of misplaced sentimentality for the name
of the root group. This is very clearly seen in the discussion about the
rec.games.frp reorg, and whether or not rec.games.frp.misc is
appropriate.
    But when you get right down to it all of this is somantics, IMHO,
and people are placing far too much value over the number of nodes in a
newsgroup name. The somantics debate should be over the charter, the
name debate should be over the most efficient name for the group when
you take into account all of the people that will be effected by this
groups creation. And the group of people that are consistently left out
are the site admins and the headaches that we give them when we go and
create a new group without thinking about how we can make their lives
more efficient, so that we can get the groups we want.

--
-Hades  (Brian V. Hughes)   | Common Taxpayer Q&A: Q. If I use the 1040 how
 hades@Coos.Dartmouth.Edu   | do I indicate my preference for the Elvis stamp?
 Mac Database Developer     | A. You write THIN ELVIS or FAT ELVIS in the box
 Dartmouth Medical School   | "Spouse's Social Security #." -Dave Barry
From: axd7104@acfcluster.nyu.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.music.enya
Date: 10 Apr 92 02:50:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: New York University

In article <1992Apr9.154647.1465@bradley.bradley.edu>, pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman) writes:
> Well, gee. I guess a kill file is completely impossible to use.

Just as a sidebar...not all newsreaders allow KILL files.  I know mine
doesn't.
-- 
Aaron Dickey                      Bitnet: axd7104@nyuacf
New York University             Internet: axd7104@ACFcluster.nyu.edu

Al Roker Is God.
From: conty@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Conty)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Some comments on this rec.arts.{whatever}.manga
Date: 10 Apr 92 17:59:15 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories

In article <axolotl.702879689@syzygy>, axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain Sinclair) writes:
> conty@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Conty) writes:
>  >Observation 2: Given Fact 6 and Fact 2, the logical naming for an Asian
>  >	comics newsgroup would be rec.arts.comics.japan.
> 
> Except that there already exists soc.culture.japan, sci.lang.japan,
> rec.arts.comics and rec.arts.anime, all of which discuss manga topics --
> certainly enough for manga to warrant its own high-level newsgroup.

It's more than enough for asian comics to have their own newsgroup.
Why does it have to be a shorter-named ("high-level") newsgroup?

> Observation: this article ignores everything else that has already
>              been discussed.

Yes, and I'm doing that for a reason.  I believe I've provided a logical
proof as to why rec.arts.comics.manga is a better choice than rec.arts.manga.

It's your burden to show me otherwise.
-- 
			    E n r i q u e  C o n t y
			      jester@ihlpl.att.com
		   Disclaimer:  You're not dealing with AT&T.
Date: 13 Apr 92 02:41:48 GMT
From: axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain Sinclair)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga vs. rec.arts.comics.manga
Reply-To: axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney

jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
 >Newsgroup names are not just for those who know about the subject of the
 >group. They are also for those who know nothing about the group.

Yes.  However, that's no excuse to force an inaccurate name on the
proposed group, simply because many Usenet users are unfamiliar with
the proposed subject matter.

 >I suspect that you'll get a lot of NO votes if you stick with rec.arts.manga
 >as the name. Is it that important to you to salve your (mistaken) feeelings
 >about being somehow subordinate to comics that you are willing to jeopardize
 >the creation of your group?

The -connotations- of putting manga under comics are only one small
facet of the naming discussion.  If you vote NO on this basis, you aren't
helping Usenet, you're hammering another nail into its coffin.

If anyone on news.groups remains uninformed on the nature of manga
(ie. all manga, not the tiny subset of comic adaptations which a lot
of mistaken people seem to be referring to), you should:

     - post or email about specific uncertainties;
  or - abstain from voting.


--
Iain Sinclair   axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au                             ne cede.
From: alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: SCIA (Is a new CFV really needed ?)
Date: 17 Apr 92 14:54:16 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr17.024045.18836@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu>, pmmuggli@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Pauline M Muggli) writes:
> 
> you made a few mistakes (imho) including posting the cfv to
> alt.native.  instead of agreeing that there is/was enough things
> that were unorthodox about the whole vote 

Sure there were things unorthodox about the vote. That is why I decided to 
conduct this straw poll to determine what the real users think about
these new situations in conducting a proposal and vote.

Are you always looking for old-fashioned orthodox votes ?
It is interesting to note that this response came from Oklahoma :-)

> and agreeing to a
> second vote and keeping your mouth shut, you are turning people
> against the idea because of your ego.  if i were a malicious
> person, i would vote against the group this time just to spite
> *you* mr. vijayvargia, not anyone else, you personally.
> 

Kind of a shallow criterion. Vote against a group not because of its
charter but because of a person associated with it ?


>  [ sentence deleted ]
> >Somehow I find it hard to believe you are seriously interested in 
> >having this group on the Usenet. You voted against the group last time, 
> >before any controversy even began. Your reason was that the group was
> >not needed and that I was creating it for my personal reasons.
> [ rest deleted ]
> 
> personally, i see the need for the s.c.i group to subdivided
> because of the number of postings.  but, i don't feel i should
> vote this time, as i didn't last time, and i am afraid if i did,
> it would be against you rather than the group, even though in
> reality it would be a vote against the group's continuation.
> 

Thanks for this statement. Looks like you can distinguish between shallow
criterion and what really matters.

Congratulations !!!

> pauline
> 

Alok
From: dcb@wdl1.wdl.loral.com (David C Blume)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:36:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: wdl.1992Apr9.173618.27444
Organization: Loral Western Development Labs

This is going is circles.  There are two easy camp to identify:

1) Those who feel manga are "Japanese comics", or "a type of comics" and
so feel the new newsgroup should be called rec.arts.comics.manga.  They
don't feel manga are inferior to comics, just a kind of them. No comics
fan said they were inferior.  Please, understand, I think your point is
understood by by rec.arts.manga advocates.

2) Those who believe that the word "comic" has an implication.  A western
implication. (not a "super-hero" implication. No manga fan argued that.)
These people feel that rec.arts.comics.manga is awkward, since there is
less cross-over between the threads in alt.manga and rec.arts.comics than
between alt.manga and soc.culture.japan and rec.arts.anime.  In terms of
content and vocal interest, there is little intersection between comics
and manga.

Persionally, I would vote for rec.manga or rec.arts.comics.books.nondomestic-
usa.japan.manga because I recognize the need for the newsgroup.  That has
been debated only once in this entire news.groups thread.  That is more
important the the naming of the group.  That can change.

People, please don't offer hate votes when the CFV comes out.  Please
*understand* the views of the two camps, realize the newsgroup name can
change, and vote on whether or not there is a demand for such a group.
It would be a shame for a worthy newsgroup to be defeated over semantics. 

--David
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| David Blume            | When you're holding a hammer, everything |
| dcb@wdl1.wdl.loral.com | looks like a nail. --Anonymous.          |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.games.mud,rec.games.mud.lp
From: claudius@zeus.calpoly.edu (King_Claudius)
Subject: Re: RFD:  rec.games.mud.social (NO)
Keywords: NOPE, I don't like. [too ambiguous]
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 20:29:44 GMT

alansz@cogsci.berkeley.edu (Alan Schwartz) says:
>NOTE: This proposal creates a single group, as per USENET policy.
>It has no effect on currently existing groups, and is independent
>of other proposed new groups.
>
>Name:	rec.games.mud.social
>Status:	unmoderated
>Charter:
>	Provide a forum for discussion related to "social"
> 	multi-user dimensions, eg. TinyMUD, MUSH, MUSE, MOO,
>	etc. Topics appropriate to the group include, but are
>	not limited to, 
>		- Questions about social muds
>		- Information about existing social muds
>		- Discussions of ideas related to social virtual reality

This newsgroup name is TOTALLY ambiguous and will create a newsgroup that will
be heavily impacted by the 'questions about social muds' and 'information about
existing social muds' [aka "Is ***MUD up?  I couldn't connect!"].

I say most definitely NO to r.g.m.social.  [r.g.m.tiny is a more acceptable
name, even tho' MOO is technically not TinyMOO...]

If, on the other hand, we created r.g.m.social AND r.g.m.tiny, I'd be happier.
-- 
VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE
---King Claudius---                                   claudius@zeus.calpoly.edu
From: forbes@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (scott.forbes)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga
Date: 11 Apr 92 01:28:51 GMT
Organization: AT&T

axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au writes:
>Not really. At the moment, the net.manga community is spending most of
>their free time trying to convince news.groups that they actually know
>enough about manga (and comics, and japan, and... ) to know where it
>belongs in the Usenet hierarchy.

Huh?  When did "knowledge of manga" become a prerequisite for deciding
where a newsgroup belongs in the USENET hierarchy?

I know a lot about mystery novels, so I know best where they belong on
the shelves of my local library.  I don't think mystery books belong
under the classification "paperback", because of all those other types of
novels which clutter up that shelf.  At the very least mystery novels
deserve the same status as paperbacks in the library organization.  And,
I know more about mystery novels than the librarians know about the
Dewey Decimal System, so you'll excuse me while I move all these books.

And some mysteries are on film!  I don't know where the library got this
bizarre classification system, where mystery films are in a separate _r_o_o_m
from mystery novels, but I know more about mysteries than they do.  So
I'll move those out here on the same shelf, too.

...In other words, knowing a lot about manga does *not* give you an
automatic insight into USENET newsgroup naming conventions.  I'd suggest
you start thinking about _w_h_y the "rec.arts.comics.{manga|japan}" people,
many of whom have no interest in manga, comics or anything else related
to the subject, find your position unreasonable.

--								   =====
Scott Forbes		AT&T Network Wireless Systems		 =---=====
Naperville, IL 		forbes@icbm.att.com			=-----=====
								==---======
								 =========
								   =====
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin
From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Geoff Bronner)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.novell reorganization
Date: 17 Apr 92 14:49:25 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Amos Tuck School

In <viking.703486719@vincent1.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:

[my bit about the comp.sys.nevell reorg discussion belonging in
news.groups deleted]

>We had a discussion in another group a few  months ago where the discussion
>proved *the group itself up for split* did not think it worthwhile.  In my
>reading of Emily Post, crossposting is only required when a proposal has
>been made and all the deadlines determined. 

One of my obejections to the current RFD is that there was NO prelimnary
discussion in comp.sys.novell. But that doesn't really matter. Once
someone took it upon themselves to post a formal RFD in news.groups all
discussion should go there. Even if you don't acknowledge any deadlines
the 30 day clock on discussion started once David Lawrence posted the RFD
in news.announce.newgroups.

So, lets follow the guidelines and have the discussion where it belongs.
Anyone interested should be willing to take the time to read news.groups
for 30 days. At the end of that time we give up or go to email.

>Failing that, I find
>this group small enough that it is one of my least cumbersome groups to
>follow and read.

I agree, I haven't seen anything to convince me to support a reorg or
comp.sys.novell.

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU  -  Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business

	"I hate Vulcans!  I hate the logic!  I hate the arrogance!"
		-Sela
Xref: sparky news.groups:9696 news.misc:877 news.newusers.questions:2233
From: sboswell@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Triangle man)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.misc,news.newusers.questions
Subject: Sauna newsgroup
Date: 7 Apr 92 23:30:49 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: University of California, San Diego

What newsgroup would one talk about saunas (the sweatbox variety,
not the swirling hot water variety.)

Please e-mail replies, I'll enlighten anyone who wants to be.

Steve Boswell
whatis@ucsd.edu
From: space@ncc1701.stgt.sub.org (Lars Soltau)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.games.frp.misc ( was: rec.arts.frp.misc)
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:32:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: ncc1701.1992Apr15.153221.1076
Organization: United Federation of Planets
X-Copyright: Nachdruck und Zitate - insbesondere unter Angabe des Autors
	oder der Organisation - ausserhalb des USENETs ist nur mit
	schriftlicher Genehmigung des Autors gestattet. In diesem
	Fall ist die Message-ID und die Newsgruppe als Quelle anzu-
	geben. Um ein Belegexemplar wird gebeten.

hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades) writes:

>imcc@cs.strath.ac.uk (Iain McCord) writes:

>>  It seems, from the RFD on soc.personals.*, that the 'powers that be' will
>>allow the passing of a vote to be ignored if other groups on the same ballot
>>fail. 
>>  I suggest that a rename of r.g.f to r.g.f.misc be added to the ballot and
>>be conditional on the passing of at least 2 other groups.

>    Damnit! I knew this kind of thing was going to start happening.
>Conditional votes are a really bad thing, and I would really like to see
>any attempt to use them fail dismally.

Could you elaborate on that? I happen to think conditional votes are
not only not harmful but the best method for big reorganizations like
this one.
-- 
Lars Soltau	bang: <insert ridiculously long path>	    BIX: -- no bucks --
		smart: space@ncc1701.stgt.sub.org

     Germany, Stuttgart-Zuffenhausen, where dreams come true: Heaven is 911!
From: atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Ran Atkinson)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: [flame] On those who run newgroup votes
Date: 13 Apr 92 23:01:09 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Distribution: na
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, DC

The ongoing and increasing use of BIZARRE vote format restrictions as
part of the voting process has gotten out of control.

  I've run votes for a number of newsgroups (including huge votes like
the IBM PC reorg) and there is NO GOOD REASON for people to have
bizarre restrictions on how a vote is worded.  As long as it is clear
that it is a vote and is not a comment AND it is clear what the vote
is, the wording should not matter or make the vote invalid.

I request a formal change to the guidelines to insert text to this effect.

  Having separate addresses for YES and NO is reasonable but to have that
PLUS bizarre formatting rules that vary from vote to vote is unreasonable.

Ran
atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil
Xref: sparky news.groups:9963 rec.music.cd:3938 rec.music.misc:13953
Date: Thursday, 9 Apr 1992 11:10:57 MST
From: Allen French <ICSAFF@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.cd,rec.music.misc
Subject: Re: RFD: removal of rec.music.cd
 <1992Apr8.141513.23833@bilver.uucp> <mvrj3kj@lynx.unm.edu>


In article <mvrj3kj@lynx.unm.edu>, lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) says:
>
>> Now that CD's have taken the world by storm the category really is
>> 1) not needed, 2) too broad, or 3) needs to be subdivided into a more
>> hierarchical order as many groups have done that have this much traffic.
>
>The only really interesting suggestion I've seen about what to do with
>r.m.cd is to rename it to rec.collecting.cd.  For what I use r.m.cd for,
>that would *almost* fit.  rec.music.cd-collectors would just about nail it.
>
Well, there seems to be at least two distinct camps of thought: those who
think r.m.cd is serving a good purpose as it is, and those who think it
is worthless as it now exists.

I belong to the first camp. I think some arguments made by those in the
second camp fell apart after it was finally revealed that THERE WAS NO
OFFICIAL CHARTER for this group.

But in any case, unless the subdivisions are very clear and easy to
understand, there are always going to be a lot of mis-postings. Surely,
all the disagreements about what is appropriate for r.m.cd indicate
that some of the proposed changes are still going to cause confusion.

I was in favor of the "mini-reorg", at least before the net-vigilantes
appeared. I think a for-sale or marketplace list is clear and useful.
So is a list for information, charts, and publicity. But, I do not
think that everything else falls into a "collecting" category.

I am interested in CDs as a music medium, and the music on the CDs. I
do not know when music is ONLY available on CDs, nor should I have to
find this out before I post. I have accumulated CDs but I do not consider
it "collecting" in the sense of a stamp collector. The very fact that
no one has been able to distill the essense of this group, is not
grounds for eliminating it, but should indicate that it serves several,
if not many purposes.

If the volume were to grow into something like r.m.misc, then I agree
more changes are needed. For now, I think separating out "sales" and
"info only" might be warranted, IF it is not tied to replacing this
list.
Newsgroups: news.groups