HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
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: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 11:54:08 GMT

twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>Even if the newsgroup creation guidelines are changed as a result of
>this free-for-all, the vote for rec.music.makers.* will still have
>been properly run, and will hold.  In order to be improperly run, a
>vote must violate existing guidelines.  Demonstrate that it did so,
>and you will have a point.  However, this vote did not.

This sounds just like any argument used to justify inconsideration and 
disrespect to an ignorant or powerless minority. Sort of like "No ethnic
minorities in the streets after 10pm". Shall I continue on this line
of reasoning?

Please understand...a way has been found under the current guidelines to
violate the spirit of them...the voter population has been skewed, which
you admitted was true some posts back. Are you still willing to follow the 
letter of your guidelines now that you have admitted this? 

>This is not a "categorical denial of the validity of opposing
>viewpoints."  It is a statement of fact.

Facts can be used to bludgeon the innocent and powerless too. Again, I 
remind you that any minority group in existence today has gone through 
just this argument. I will try and modify the guidelines so that the 
definition of an improper vote can be extended. But this vote is bad, 
no matter what I do. Are you willing to follow the letter and destroy the
spirit? 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Possession of a system of knowledge, or any part of it, or an interest in it
or in discovering one, should not be assumed to confer any license or capacity
to operate it. Individual criticisms of a system, incapacity to operate it,
or dissatisfaction with it should not be confused with any shortcoming of the
system itself.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 15:12:14 GMT

In article <6PSSBADB@cc.swarthmore.edu> hildebra@math.wisc.edu (Jeff Hildebrand) writes:

>I'm fairly
>certain that I've seen CFV cross-posted to groups which would not be
>affected directly, but might have people who are interested in
>participating.

If you* chose to ignore the CFV on the basis that it "might" have been
posted to rec.music.synth only because that group was vaguely relevant
to the CFV, then you should be prepared to reap the consequences.
Knowing that CFVs and RFDs are often posted to groups which are
directly and immediately affected by the proposal is enough to get me
to look at every one I see in a group that interests me.

*This is meant as the "generic you," rather than you in particular,
Jeff.

>	Once again, this is reproving what happened last summer in the
>sf-lovers fiasco. Including renamings with splits is a very risky business
>and should probably be handled seperately.

That's a good point.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Dave Hayes will not quit
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff & Nonsense Division
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 23:31:53 GMT

In article <141398@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> gary_preckshot@lccmail.ocf.llnl.gov (gary preckshot) writes:

>rsk writes
>
>>Actually, there have been a number of controversies before this one; this
>>is only the latest.
>
>A person with a modicum of wit would conclude there are some problems.

Certainly there are.  It is difficult to get the appropriate
information to new users so that they understand, but as pointed out,
there are entirely too many people who will wilfully refuse to learn
though they are given every opportunity to do so.  That's a shame.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: tsang@cs.washington.edu (Donald Tsang)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.games.frp.campaign
Date: 7 Nov 92 04:54:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: beaver.1992Nov7.045422.27884
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle

In article <> cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca () writes:
>[proposal deleted; you guys can go back and read it yourselves]

A few comments:

(a) It's not clear to me that discussion of an AD&D campaign (for
    example) would be interesting to (say) Champions GM's.

(b) Moderated newsgroups have decidedly bad post-to-appearance
    time, and are therefore quite bad as discussion groups.  Any
    group that has as part of its discussion "discussion about..."
    should probably be unmoderated.

(c) Campaign moves, as such, seem highly relevant to rgf.archives;
    why the insistence of moving "fluff" out of the "fluff" newsgroup?

(d) I feel that "campaigning" is not just "one of the most important
    concepts of role playing", but rather *the* most important concept.
    But the Net voted down countless proposals about splitting the
    rec.games.frp hierarchy into "campaign" vs "rules" vs (whatever
    else)... wouldn't rec.games.frp.campaigns pretty much make
    rec.games.frp.misc useless for anything but rules questions?

    Is it really so hard to follow threads like "Interesting Campaign
    Ideas" on rec.games.frp.misc and rec.games.frp.dnd?

(e) Posting once-monthly FAQ's, Campaign Statistics, etc would be
    welcome on rec.games.frp.archives, just as Campaign Moves would
    be.  The two main reasons for .archives' existence are: the posting
    of "fluff", and the posting of articles that give useful
    information without being actual "announcements".  Examples of the
    latter include: new character classes (for systems with character
    classes), NPC descriptions, and secret society or cult descriptions.


To summarize, I believe rec.games.frp.{misc,dnd} already provide two
centralized locations to study (discuss) campaigns [e.g., the ones
written about in rec.games.frp.archives, or ones described in the
newsgroups].  So, instead of being Unique, the proposed groups seems...
well, stifling (because of moderation) and superfluous.  It also
unsplits xD&D from the rest of the hierarchy, which is probably bad.

From what I can figure out, what the proposer (cbnorman) really wants
is the old rec.games.frp, with a minimum literacy requirement and
lack of rules questions and flaming.

If we had had that, nobody would have voted for the split in the first
place...

-- 
Donald Tsang                    "Ho!  Haha!  Guard!  Turn!  Parry!  Dodge!
tsang@june.cs.washington.edu     Spin!  Ha!  Thrust!"
..!uw-beaver!june!tsang                       -- Robin Hood Daffy
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 07:02:39 GMT
Organization: None for me, thanks . . . I'm driving.

gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:

> Please note: I am NOT demanding a re-vote. The main reason I respond to 
> posts like this is that I think the way this turned out was crummy and 
> that in the future we can do better. I feel that the efforts of people 
> such as this poster to imply that the vote would have turned out the
> same would block the efforts to improve the system. 

The biggest obstacle to your getting across your points about changing the
guidelines (which I consider perfectly reasonable, by the way) is the fact
that you're doing it in the same thread as this inane flame war.  Take the
guidelines discussion to a new thread in news.admin.policy and you'll have
an audience who'll be able to listen to what you have to say without
first having to pick it out of a stack of Dave Haye's paranoid fantasies. 

(There's some irony in the fact that you're discussing amending the
guidelines to require clearer RFD/CFD subject lines in a thread whose
subject has nothing to do with what you're discussing.)

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)

"At last!  A cure for loud Hawaiian shirts!"
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: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 02:16:19 GMT

barrett@daisy.ee.und.ac.za (Alan P Barrett) writes:
>I understand that some readers are at the mercy of poorly administered
>gateways or news systems, and that such users really are harmed by the
>name change.  This is unfortunate, but I think that it is inappropriate
>for their plight to have more than a trivial effect on decisions that
>affect the entire Usenet.

I don't think that it inappropriate, but I don't have an idea of how to
make it appropriate either. 

>You have said that the readers didn't get proper warning.  I see your
>point. 

T H A N K  Y O U !!!

Now maybe we can get some discussion done. 

>It seems to me that they got as much warning as is customary,
>and that the vote is therefore valid, but I think that the guidelines
>should be changed to increase the customary degree of warning.

Somewhat agreed. IN particular, there needs to be some mechanism of
flexibility written into the guidelines so that this can be handled
in a good way in the future. 

>You have said that the readers want to keep the old name.  This
>contradicts your point that they don't care about news admin.

Actually, the point was that they don't care about what the admins
want to name it. 

>You have said that many readers have left the group as a direct result
>of the name change, but I cannot understand why this should be.  Could
>you try to explain their reasons in more detail?

I am not them. No I cannot. 

>You say that the vote should be invalidated.  I say NO.  It was run
>according to the letter and the spirit of the guidelines, and it passed.

Here we disagree. Letter, yes. Spirit, no. This is where Chip and I are
at an impasse also. 

>If this happens, I will carefully consider the merits of the vote,
>without regard to the personalities of the people involved.

Makes damn good sense to ME. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

The most important service rendered by the press is that of educating people to
approach printed matter with distrust. 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: alt.pres.clinton
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:11:03 GMT

In article <BxF8Ms.DnG@well.sf.ca.us> rchao@well.sf.ca.us (Robert Chao) writes:

>Isn't alt.president.clinton kind of redundant with alt.politics.clinton?

(a) Discussions of alt groups belong in alt.config.
(b) alt.president.clinton is a bogus group, not discussed in
    alt.config before its creation.
(c) Yes, it is.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: todd@refrig.dixie.com (Todd H.)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.dent
Date: 11 Nov 92 14:30:06 GMT
Organization: the Bear Creek Tinkerer's Society and Social Club

ellswort@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Alec Ellsworth) writes:

>		New Group Proposal
>	I propose that we begin discussion about a new 
>mainstream newsgroup named sci.dent. It will be unmoderated
>and has as its main objective to allow internet users (dentists,
>dental students, researchers, and patients) the opportunity
>to discuss Dentistry and any dental related issues.

Please call it sci.dentistry, as when I saw your RFD, I thought at first
that you were starting a group on auto body work (dents).  Thanks.

-- 
Todd++;
------------------
todd@refrig.dixie.com
**** I voted with the majority this past election - AGAINST Clinton! ****
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Date: 13 Nov 1992 14:25:40 GMT
Organization: Brown University Planetary Geology
NNTP-Posting-Host: pilsner.geo.brown.edu

In article <1992Nov12.163041.10382@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
>If there isn't a clear,  
>enforcable way that people can be informed about the process and the  
>critical things they need to know, you can't assume that the public as a  
>whole will be represented by a vote held within the process.

   USENET is at best a very loose society.  There is absolutely no
way that anybody can force anybody to learn anything, nor is there
any given way for any policies to be enforced.  If you can't or
won't understand that, I fear you'll never be in a position to
change things (assuming it's really needed).  As recent discussions
indicate, regardless of how one defines a process, there will
always be those who feel (or claim to feel) disenfranchised by that
process.
   How about this as a reasonable way to give people an opportunity
become involved in the process:  2-3 times over the course of 3-4 weeks,
post messages to relevant newsgroups stating that a discussion is
underway to determine whether or not a change is necessary, and that
all members of USENET, and especially members of the groups in question,
are invited to participate.  Then, when the matter has been discussed,
post 2-3 messages over a 3-4 week period calling for votes on the
matter, again, making sure the messages get posted to all involved
newsgroups.  That way, anybody reading one of the groups would have
equal potential to know about and get involved with the process.
Failure to get involved indicates a distinct choice not to participate
fully in the newsgroup.  (Note that failure to participate fully includes
failure to read the 4-6 messages posted over a 6-8 week period.  Remember,
no one can force anybody to do anything, and no matter what one may put
in a subject line, or within 15.3 lines of the top of a message, there
will be somebody who will use ignorance as an excuse to complain.)
--
Joel Plutchak, Research Programmer/Analyst
Xref: sparky news.groups:21141 rec.arts.poems:11145
From: marek@mermaid.msel.unh.edu (Marek Lugowski)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.arts.poems
Subject: Re: where is the RESULT of voting on rec.arts.poems.urdu? / Marek
Date: 10 Nov 1992 01:54:26 GMT
Organization: UNH Marine Systems Engineering Laboratory
NNTP-Posting-Host: mermaid.msel.unh.edu

rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller) writes:

>>It is a full week later and no RESULT has been posted anywhere, with
>>news.announce.newgroup the official, moderated, place to look.
>

>He may have already sent the results to the moderator who does have other 
>things to do than to instantly turn vote results. Wait for the next major
>set of postings for news.announce.newgroups and see if the results are there;
>if they are not, then bitch about it! There have been no postings since the
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>deadline expired so just be patient.

     At the completion of the voting period, the vote taker must post the
                                                            ^^^^^^^^^
     vote tally and the E-mail addresses and (if available) names of the
     voters received to news.announce.newgroups and any other groups
                     ^^                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     or mailing lists to which the original call for votes was posted
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

We should not have to wait.  The results are not blessed by appearing
in n.a.n.  (pun on Urdu bread not intended).

				-- Marek
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca ()
Subject: Re: r.g.f.campaign + scenarios
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 07:02:09 GMT

In article <1dm0ttINNcnj@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> fau@po.CWRU.Edu (Francis A. Uy) writes:
>
>cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca () says:
>
>>millerl@wharton.upenn.edu writes:
>
>>>See how bad the name is? We don't even have the group and people already
>>>think it's something other than the person who proposed it intended. By
>>>the way, Graham, if you want a group for campaign descriptions, try
>>>rec.games.frp.archives.
>>>
>>What are you talking about? The proposal for .campaign specificly states
>>that discussions of campaigns and campaigning is permitted.  Read the
>>proposal before you flame.
>
>Cbnorman:
>
>Millerl is saying that groups for the dissemination
> of campaign concept material ALREADY EXIST.  A new
> group is NOT needed for this purpose.  
>
>In fact, how do intend to have campaign discussion
> on a moderated group where the posting criteria is
> "high quality stories"?

Read the proposal.  You're about two weeks behind.
>
>The description of your proposal seems to indicate
> that it will be used for ONGOING ROLEPLAY, which
> IMHO is a BAD idea.  Actual gaming should be done
> by email.  
>
You have something against ongoing roleplay?  I doubt
that will make you very popular in the r.g.f newsgroups....



Newsgroups: news.groups
From: tomrice@netcom.com (Tom R. Rice)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.crafts.metalworking
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 06:07:36 GMT

Forgive my obtuse views, but I really don't give a <bleep> what the
group is called.  I just want to make neat stuff out of metal; this
involves any or all of blacksmith skills, welding skills, lathe and
mill skills, metrology skills, etc., etc.  I am on no ego trip, I
really don't care what people call me or what terms they use to 
describe my activities.  I just want to make neat stuff out of metal,
I have a lot to learn and would like to have a (friendly?) group
to assist me in my efforts.  

In truth, however, I do appreciate and take pride in what is commonly
called "craftsmanship".  But, then, what do _I_ know?

trr 
-- 
"Start off every day with a smile and get it over with."  --W.C.Fields
Tom R. Rice   WB6BYH                   Holler Observatory - 
tomrice@netcom.com                     Longitude:  121 d  30 m  20 s W 
CIS: 71160,1122                        Latitude:    37 d  25 m  10 s N 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 03:09:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.113104.27214@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:

>twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>
>>Yep.  A whole bunch of people failed to acquaint themselves with the
>>basic workings of Usenet.
>
>It's NOT BASIC!!

So you think.

>Do you have any idea how many people on the net don't 
>even know that group names are subject to vote?

That they don't know that doesn't mean it's not basic.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Xref: sparky news.groups:21211 rec.music.synth:18272
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: Was: *BAD* : VOTE ON * rec.synth *
Keywords: Why not just * .synth * ?
Date: 11 Nov 92 16:57:47 GMT
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division

In article <1992Nov10.105047@is.morgan.com> sergei@is.morgan.com (Sergei Poliakoff) writes:

>Namespace SHOULD be decided by the *elite* : respectable system 
>administrators, and not by vote.

Even if we assume that's how it should be (and I'm not sure it is),
it's a terrible idea to remove newsgroup participants from the
name-decision process completely.  You have no guarantee that the
administrators understand the proposed content well enough to place
the group properly.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: "BAD" music group reorg will not be honored
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 04:54:25 GMT
Organization: None for me, thanks . . . I'm driving.

cuz@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Cousin It) writes:

>>> The system is not broken, at least not on this point. 
>>
>> Maybe it is. 
>
> Two differing opinions, somewhere in the night.  

Whoot whoot! Brummmmm! Ding ding!

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: METZE@VMETZE.MRL.UIUC.EDU (Virginia Metze)
Subject: rec.equestrian.racing => rec.sporting.racing.horse
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24
Organization: Materials Research Laboratory
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:14:02 GMT


It has been suggested to me that rec.sports.racing.horse
might be a better name for this proposed news group.

I am willing to put it in that category provided it still
allows a discussion of all issues, people-related, handicapping
related, and horse related!   I look at horse racing as
more related to the 'horse scene' than the sport scene,
but as long as the sports category permits full discussion,
I don't mind.




+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Virginia Metze, speaking for no one but herself  + Impeach the Rehnquist
metze@vmetze.mrl.uiuc.edu                        + 5, 6, or 7
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
VMS cluster managers:  do you know where your queue manager is right now?
=============================================================================

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: @apollo.HP.COM (Jennifer E. Levine)
Subject: Re:  RFD: rec.equestrian.racing -- the name/hierarchy
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 13:46:30 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <BxMszH.487@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, METZE@VMETZE.MRL.UIUC.EDU (Virginia Metze) writes:
|> 
|> I have been doing some thinking about the suggestion that
|> the racing category not be part of the hierarchy rec.equestrian.
|> 
|> On reflection, I believe that that is where it belongs, and not
|> under sports.  
|> 
|> If the present people using the rec.equestrian category are
|> so strongly opposed to racing and other activities in which
|> horses are involved, their group should be under talk.pets.
 
Do you read rec.equestrian?

Many of the readers oppose racing and not other activities in which horses
are involved. Many of these people are interested in many "other activities in
which horses are involved."

I think these people have seen horses abused by race tracks. You may not be the
one who does this, you may not even know about this, but some, maybe all of the
people in rec.equestrian care.

You are asking to be part of them. Telling them to take their business else
where seems wrong to me. They are happy where they are.

        --Jennifer
        jlevine@apollo.hp.com
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: Bogus CFV: rec.music.reggae
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 00:26:12 GMT
Organization: None for me, thanks . . . I'm driving.

fau@po.CWRU.Edu (Francis A. Uy) writes:

>> (At this rate, I estimate he'll finally figure out how to post a valid 
>> CFD and get things officially rolling...
>  ^^^
> Lazlo!

Sorry about that -- Dave Hayes is using up all the oxygen in here.

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)
Xref: sparky news.groups:20393 rec.music.synth:17815
From: gingeric9178@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored20663
Date: 6 Nov 92 01:46:28 -0600
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

I'd like to say that this is the first time I have posted about the renaming of
r.m.s. and I wish to have a revote if that is at all possible.  Thank you...

Robert Williams, driller killer, ripping holes..