HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ksdavis@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Karleenus Schwartz Davis)
Subject: Music Group Reorg Disagreement (was Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:47:07 GMT

[Subject line changed.  Again.  Distribution changed from usa to world.]

>ray@philmtl.philips.ca (Ray Dunn) writes:
>> Quite pathetic really.

gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes: 
>As pathetic as not listening to people that are providing feeback and  
>suggestions?

Don't you dare try to say this is merely 'feedback and suggestions'
when you're posting under the subject line "*BAD* music reorg will not
be honored."   This thread was started by someone screaming "REVOTE!!"
and the character has not changed much since then.  Some suggestions
for changes have been proposed, and are being thought over -- but
notice that half the time, the suggestions are wrapped in a message
asking for an immediate revote.  Explaining over and over why there
can't be a revote takes precedence over considering new suggestions.
If people would calm down about why this vote was "BAD," when clearly
it was the fault of the guidelines and not the man, then we could get
on to something more constructive like a rational discussion about
possible changes to the guidelines.

-sz
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: kozlowsk@acs.ucalgary.ca (Don M. Kozlowski)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: Should rec.music.makers.synth stand as a group name?
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:22:18 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

As a totally uninterested bystander in the rec.music.makers
renaming I must nontheless go on record as saying that I will
vote to keep the name rec.music.makers.synth if the CFV goes out
phrased in this manner. In fact I'll campaign vigorously among
the local users for their votes as well. I don't care what the
group is called, but I don't feel a group should be required to
justify itself after a passed vote.  RFD's phrased in this manner
should NOT be encouraged.

If the CFV is reworded to something like:
CFV: Should rec.music.makers.synth be renamed to rec.music.synth 
I will abstain.

-- 
Don Kozlowski	                 	Phone: (403) 220-5156
Academic Computing Services		Fax:   (403) 282-9199
The University of Calgary
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 02:17:22 GMT

chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>And of course people who do speak get flamed into oblivion.
>If you can't take the heat, etc.

Here's yet another elitist remark. In fact, it's a good example of a class
distinction...

"Those who haven't been inured to heavy flaming" and "Those who have".
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

   A man appointed to be judge has been killed without a knife.
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Bruce Norman promises to drop RFD for rec.games.frp.campaign
Date: 13 Nov 92 19:41:20 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu


Loren makes a good case for cbnorman to pay the piper.  Me, I strongly and
firmly believe that Mr Norman will revert to true form and expound that
he was talking about *only* his most current proposal, that we don't
understand and will tell us to go back and read it again.

Five coppers on my wager, Loren?  Anyone?

-- 
Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy" until you can find a rock.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: To keep the r.m.s rename is _not_ elitist (was Re: *BAD*...)
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 22:01:27 GMT

chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>>    How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup
>>That should be "How to avoid getting your newsgroup changed without
>>your knowledge"...or "You too can participate in newsgroup politics".
>Oh, man, now you are going to carp on the titles of the periodic
>postings?!  

And why not? It's a valid complaint...

Because of events here, I think we can both infer that the
titles are not clear enough. "Clear enough" is defined as 95% of people
who read the title can understand the name. I challenge you to prove that
the title is clear enough under those circumstances. You'll need to take
an unbiased sample...

>Can't you stop retreating and retrenching long enough to
>realize that you've lost this battle?

No. Sorry. I'm enjoying myself too much here.
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

               Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth,news.admin.policy
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, 7 Nov 1992 00:09:26 GMT

jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap) writes:
>   least, a revote should be held with this one subject separate from the rest
>   of the votes, with a clear and precise subject line so that ALL people
>   in rec.music.synth are made aware of this. 
>It was posted to r.m.s because it was relevant.  

How is the average usenetter going to know that? I'm sorry...but the
offense of "ignorance is no excuse" holds little water when discussing
the relative merits of a decision that will affect those who were supposedly
ignorant.

>People ignored it.

But WHY? Was it because they didn't care what the name was? Or was it 
because they didn't think that it was related to rec.music.synth? The
subject line tends to support that the latter sentiment was more true
than the first one. In ANY case, because of the ambiguity...the "ignorance"
offense is not valid in this argument.

>If you see an RFD or a CFV in a group you read, it can affect you.

I didn't know this and I've been reading the net for some years. Give me
a break...the words pertaining to that are hidden within the guidelines
(*which few ever read*) and the first time netter (of which there are an
estimated 2 million) is not going to know this off the bat. Do you really
*want* everyone to go away mad? 

>Propose something.  If they aren't USENET, they should be properly
>gatewayed so that the USENET name change doesn't affect them.

Let's start with a revote. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

    If it works...use it. If it doesn't, find out why and use THAT.
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: RFD: Should rec.music.makers.synth stand as a group name?
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:58:30 GMT

In article <1dtnqnINNiod@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak) writes:
>      1) The name change was run and voted on in accordance with the
>         Guidelines.  As such, the results should stand.

I don't recall seeing comp.protocols.tcp-ip,eniac recently.
--
"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RESULT: rec.arts.poems.urdu passes 303:145
Date: 10 Nov 1992 18:28:52 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston


Once again, proof that a soc.culture.foo group will always pass if the people
belonging to the foo culture want it.

Even if the group is in rec.arts.poems.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
     We survived Jimmy Carter; we'll (probably) survive Bill Clinton.
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
From: hill@norman.VI.RI.CMU.EDU (Robert Hill)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 19:08:59 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

Tom Holub writes
> In article <BxIHnn.Cw@uunet.uu.net> adc@tardis.cl.msu.edu (Alan D.  
Cabrera) writes:
> I will say up front that I don't feel that the volume in 
> rec.games.netrek warrants a split, and that the groups I monitor that 
> have recently undergone splits of this nature have all been adversely 
> affected.

This is my primary concern.  I read all messages on rec.games.netrek, so  
it really wouldn't matter if I read all of .programmer, .d, etc or in  
sequentail order as it stands now.  What has seems to happen (in my  
admittedly limited) newsgroups experience is that low-mid volume groups  
(like rec.games.netrek) split, and then you never really get the volume  
you had before.  I'm not sure if this is the desired outcome, or not, but  
I certainly don't like the idea.

> )Moderated by Alan D. Cabrera (adc@tardis.cl.msu.edu). If anyone 
> )else is interested in assisting contact Alan.
> 
> Does Alan D. Cabrera have the time to do this?  He is, after all,
> the one complaining about spending too much time dealing with
> the messages on rec.games.netrek.  Perhaps we should find someone
> with more time.

Seriously.  His whole argument on rec.games.netrek was that he didn't want  
to waste the time weeding throught the messages.

> )rec.games.netrek.inl
> )
> )Discussions directly related to the Intercollegiate Netrek 
> )League, INL.
> 
> As the founder of the INL and as an INL council member, I will say that
> I feel that INL discussion does not warrant its own newsgroup, and that
> the INL would be affected detrimentally by taking its news traffic out
> of the mainstream netrek traffic.  

I completely agree.

Rob
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 12 Nov 92 00:23:45 GMT
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft

In article <1992Nov10.214716.26105@daimi.aau.dk> rorschak@daimi.aau.dk  
(Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
> 
> >Unimportant to YOU. This whole issue was unimportant to many people  
until  
> >previously. Perhaps, one shouldn't have to know the insides of the net  
> >guidelines to make an informed decsision about the fate of the  
newsgroups  
> >that they subscribe to.
> 
> All you have to do is to read a single article and follow the  
instructions
> found within. It's simple and easy to learn.

And the article should be clearly labelled so that a busy person will  
notice it and read it. You think it was. I think it wasn't. 
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
From: nsw@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Neil Weinstock)
Subject: Re: A question, a comment
Organization: The Flying Squid Patrol
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 00:16:28 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.185944.28723@muddcs.claremont.edu> irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith) writes:
>Question: Who, specifically, does the renaming of rec.music.synth harm, and
>how? I'm looking for specifics about this particular renaming, not general
>comments about "disempowerment". Will sites drop the group because of the
>name change? Will users be confused by the name change and drop the group?
>Various people have suggested various dire outcomes, and been refuted in
>various ways; I'd like to see someone (Dave Hayes?) post a reasonably
>concise summary of WHY this renaming was a bad thing.

I believe it does not do much harm, based on all the previously expounded
arguments.  I believe, however, that as a result of the ruckus raised by
Dave Hayes et al, many in rec.music.synth will be convinced that there *is*
great harm, resulting in an inflated number of ex post facto opposition votes.
I cannot prove this, just a hunch.  Arguments to the effect of "it wasn't
broke, so why fix it?" clearly do not reflect any real harm.

>To address one possible answer:
>
>In a prior article, Dave Hayes (dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov) writes:
>
>> My concern about this problem developed after the vote passed and when
>> people were dropping away from r.m.s like flies.
>
>Can you demonstrate that users have unsubscribed to r.m.s because of the
>name change? This doesn't seem like a logical response to me. If a group I
>read was renamed, I'd just start reading the new group, and I don't see why
>even a novice user wouldn't do the same.

I believe that r.m.s (will lose|has lost) plenty of people simply due to the 
enormous flamefest; r.m.s has historically been pretty tame, with high S/N
(some might disagree I suppose.)  This fiasco comes close on the heels of
another one where a regular (and vocal) poster lost net privileges, resulting
in a prolonged debate on free speech issues, etc.  It's gonna be a while before
the group recovers from all of this....

                                - Neil

--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--
Neil Weinstock @ AT&T Bell Labs         //     What was sliced bread
att!edsel!nsw or nsw@garage.att.com   \X/    the greatest thing since?
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 05:18:07 GMT

In article <2B03B31D.93E9@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>>If the people who support your position don't step out into the light
>>>and speak their piece, their opinions will not be heard.
>>And of course people who do speak get flamed into oblivion.
>If you can't take the heat, etc.

Who's to blame?  Is it sensible to drive people out and then say it's their
fault for being driven out instead of at least partly yours for _driving_ them
out?  The fact that people "chose" to leave is not an excuse for making life as
difficult as possible for the ones who stick around.
--
"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cathyf@is.rice.edu (Catherine Anne Foulston)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Rice University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:36:32 GMT

In article <7761@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:

>>Also suppose that buried in an
>>extremely long list of topics was a vote to make these newsgroups into
>>subgroups of comp.protocols.tcp-ip.

>Assuming that your chain of events above were true, then yes, we'd be stuck
>with it. However, every step in your case has a flaw.

And here's the whole point of the previous discussions on this:
Let's say rec.bicycles was one of the groups where this announcement
was posted.  I used to kill a lot of threads in rec.bicycles (before
it got reorganized itself) but if I saw a tcp-ip reorg RFD posted to
rec.bicycles, I'd wonder why, and read it to make sure someone wasn't
doing something weird.  Enough people would probably do this that the
vote would fail.

Besides, other than namespace purity, I wouldn't really give a nickel
whether it got renamed to comp.protocols.tcp-ip.bicycles.  Same stuff
would be there.

	Cathy
-- 
Cathy Foulston + Rice University + Network & Systems Support + cathyf@rice.edu
From: rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 8 Nov 92 02:17:31 GMT
Organization: GSP Whitewater Slalom Racing Team

In article <5AWSB8C8@cc.swarthmore.edu> hildebra@math.wisc.edu (Jeff Hildebrand) writes:
>	How far would you say that someone should read before coming to a
>conclusion about a CFV? Would reading the first screen be enough? This is
>not a rhetorical question.

My answer: "the whole thing".  Even the longest CFV's I've ever seen
were only 4-5 screenfuls and took less than a minute to read through.
I deliberately kept mine short in order to make it easy for people
to read.  As I pointed out in an earlier article, the entire proposal
is contained in 26 lines, several of which are blank.

(BTW, some people have suggested subscribing to news.groups, which is
a fine idea, but can be a time-consuming proposition.
If you subscribe to news.announce.newgroups, which is a moderated,
low-traffic group, you'll see all the CFD's and CFV's without
having to wade through the stuff in news.groups.  If you are
interested in newsgroup creation/deletion/naming issues, you
should read this group; if you don't, then you should
be prepared to accept the consequences of that decision.)

About the "first screen" business; given that people use different
software which is configured in different ways and then personally
tailored to fit, it is impossible to anticipate what screen any
portion of an article will fall on.  Example: I use rn on a 24x80
dumb terminal at home, and xvnews on a workstation at work.  I wind
up seeing about the first 16 lines of each article at home (because I
have most of the headers suppressed) and about the first 40 lines of
each article at work (because I have the article-window set to a
large size).  

Some folks have complained that the CFV did not specify
"renaming rec.music.synth" on the "Subject" line.  Well, the CFV
also involved renaming alt.guitar, alt.bass, and alt.guitar.tab
(by creating equivalent groups in the rec.music.makers hierarchy
and removing the old ones) and creating a completely new newsgroup
for drummers/percussionists.  Just how much of this should go on
the "Subject" line, and how would you fit it?  What order should
it go in?  (I'll  bet that if the rec.music.makers.synth proposal
were last on the "Subject" line, that people would complain about
it falling off the right side of their screens.  I wish I were joking.)
I chose "rec.music.makers.*" because I felt that it succinctly covered
all of the proposals. I still think that's true.

---Rsk
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: Music Group Reorg Disagreement (was Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored)
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:51:59 GMT

Gordon> == Gordon Van Huizen <gvh@metrosoft.com> 

 Gordon> Couldn't you spend *some* of your time making it easier for
 Gordon> those people instead of alienating them?

Would it satisfy you if Chip were forced to write a document about
USENET?  He could call it "What is USENET?" and have it posted monthly
in a number of newusers groups.
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>
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: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 09:05:06 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.071644.4478@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:

>In YOUR opinion it was properly run - obviously more than a few people  
>disagree with you.

They are wrong.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy,rec.music.synth
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 09:32:22 GMT

jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>As I said earlier, allowing your loud, agonized screaming to invalidate a vote
>run exactly according to the Guidelines will seriously damage the only method
>we have of making decisions on newsgroups. That's what it could hurt, and
>that's why I'm so adamantly opposed to it. Bring it up again in 6 months if
>there are still problems; this would be according to the Guidelines.

By your holy Guidelines, I can (and probably will) bring up a vote NOW 
if I so choose. 

And think you that there's been no serious damage already? Do you guys
even CARE about how many people you alienate with your damn inflexibility?

>>I will never agree to that. Silence as an implied vote is a wonderful tool
>>of political control. 
>Welcome to the real world. If someone fails to express an opinion, there is
>no way to determine what they really want. 

Well what about the expressed opinions in my mailbox? I'm gathering them
now as we speak. Just because they didn't express them to you doesn't mean
that they aren't there. Ignorance hides two votes...those that don't care
and those that don't know that they can or should care. It is those latter
who NEED to be addressed...or this similar thing will happen AGAIN and AGAIN
and AGAIN and...

Look, can't you even see that there is a problem?

>Most of the time, though, they don't split the flow in half. Your actions will
>do more to hurt rec.music.[makers.]synth than anything else.

That's unfounded and untrue. I refuse to rmgroup it and that's the way it
stands. If you don't like it, run a vote. <grin> 

>...and your choice hurts those you're claiming to help. This is progress? If
>you were helping me like this, I'd ask you to please stop.

If and when they do, I will. Right now, my mailbox has an 80% support ratio.

>Put simply, your argument is not with the Guidelines, but rather with those
>who refuse to make the trivial changes required to support a legitimate vote
>passed within them. Go yell at them.

Far more importantly, and now the issue is going to a more grand scale,
my issue is with those who are so inflexible as to oppose the very users
they serve. I *will* do what ever I have to do to get the Guidelines 
changed so that is never possible again. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Honest (adj.) - Someone who is secretly regarded by everyone as an enemy.
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.collecting.cards
Date: 5 Nov 92 18:35:55 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <3NOV199215145577@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov> cazuzek@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (Zuzek, John E.) writes:
>extending to a .cards - i.e., I suggest splitting the group into two 
>totally new groups:
>
>	rec.collecting.cards	postings ONLY about and for card collecting
>	-and-
>	rec.collecting.misc	
>	-or-
>	rec.collecting.other	postings about ALL non-card collecting such 
>				as coins, stamps, figurines, plates, etc...

Why just two?  Why not split out some of the other "majors" (note: NOT
being a collector I have no idea which groups would be largest, so just
take this as an example):

	rec.collecting.cards	-- obvious
	rec.collecting.coins	-- obvious
	rec.collecting.stamps	-- obvious
	rec.collecting.misc	-- figurines, plates, comics, etc....

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
It's not the way that you say it	|
when you do those things to me,		|	-Richard Hartman	
it's more the way you really mean it	|	hartman@uLogic.COM
when you tell me what will be.		|