HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lhp@daimi.aau.dk (Lasse Hiller|e Petersen)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.miniatures
Keywords: miniatures figures ancients napoleonics renaissance naval
Organization: DAIMI: Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 19:00:50 GMT

hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:

>In article <C19L6G.MGK@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> charbonn@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (gary charbonneau) writes:
>>In article <C198uG.y0@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (Alec Habig) writes:
>>>already fills the need.  Most people on the net who are into miniatures already
>>>read this group, and so would have instant access to anything posted there.

>I disagree.   rec.games.board cover table-top gaming of all sorts,
>but rec.games.miniatures could cover some miniature-specific things
>that really aren't game-specific such as painting techniques.

Such discussion can be found, or is welcome (if I recall the charter
correctly), in rec.models.scale. Including fantasy miniatures.

Perhaps the miniature modelling aspect should have its own group in the
rec.models hierarchy. After all, the techniques etc are not specific to
miniatures for game use, but also used for dioramas etc.

Not to say that a newsgroup for games using such miniatures should not be
created. I have no particular interest in games, although I certainly am
interested in modelling miniatures for dioramas.
--
Lasse Hiller|e Petersen - lhp@daimi.aau.dk ! "Der Mensch ist noch mehr Affe
Department of Information & Media Science  ! als irgend ein Affe"
Aarhus University, DENMARK                 !  -Nietzsche
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jamesd@techbook.com (James Deibele)
Subject: Re: Reorg of misc.jobs.*
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 220-0636
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 01:15:16 GMT

emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti) writes:

>I've seen a nice list of the "pdaxs.jobs.*" groups that subdivide 
>jobs into about 15 categories, they look pretty well thought through.

Thanks.  The "pdaxs" set of groups are not anywhere nearly as active as
we'd like, but the goal was to set up groups oriented towards the
Portland area that would allow commercial postings.  The people in pdx.*
would (quite rightfully) object to recruiters posting ads for a
multitude of positions in pdx.general or pdx.whatever.  

Nevertheless, the net is a wonderful medium for posting ads and 
receiving information.  Thus the pdaxs groups were created because I 
wanted to be able to talk to retailers.  The "final straw" was somebody 
asking in pdx.general where he could get his Swiss army knife repaired.
I was tempted to flame him for being too lazy to look in the Yellow 
Pages, but he actually received two replies suggesting good places to try.

Obviously people do want to use the net to communicate about businesses.
The pdx.* groups have a lot of people who ask about where to get their 
car repaired, their house painted, their children cared for, and so on.
I speculate about replacing laws (at least to some degree) with 
information: instead of passing more civil rights laws, organization A 
(after checking it carefully) tells the community that company Z 
discriminates.  The community then (we hope) boycotts company Z until 
they change their ways. 

Anyway, the pdaxs groups are way ahead of their time, because we've only 
been able to persuade a few companies to use them.  But we wanted to
"prime the pump" ...

--
jamesd@techbook.COM                   "2091 newsgroups & nothing on ..."  
PDaXs gives free access to news & mail. (503) 220-0636 - 1200/2400, N81  
Full internet (ftp, telnet, irc) access available. Voice: (503) 223-4245
600MB of programs sent to you every month - send to cd@techbook.com
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: newgroup comp.archives.msdos.announce moderated
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:21:03 GMT

In article <C1GvH1.3pD@ulowell.ulowell.edu> oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:

>This message is being sent out again as it seems that some places still
>aren't getting the group...

Maybe they don't want it.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: bu951@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian R. Beeler)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD soc.religion.mormon -- to moderate or not
Date: 21 Jan 1993 07:12:00 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bu951@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian R. Beeler)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, bu951@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian R. Beeler) says:

>
>In a previous article, scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) says:
>
>>I would support an unmoderated group on the Mormon religion.  I
>>would support a moderated group if and only if the charter and
>>moderator clearly declared that the content of the group would
>>not be restricted to only those topics which Mormons are allowed
>>to talk about publicly.  Non-mormons are free of such restrictions,
>                              ^ "M" 
>>and a mormon group is clearly the place for such discussions.
>       ^ "M"
>
>WRONG! 
>
>>While I understand and even sympathise with the desire for a
>>forum of and for Mormons, the Network News isn't it.
>
>"What, a newsgroup we can destroy someone in? NO WAY!" 
>
>>
>>[[ yes, I know there are existing groups which attempt to be
>>   exclusionary based on politics and religion.  I don't think
>>   they belong on the public net either.  So sue me.  :-)  ]]
>>-- 
>>	"You can't get here from here."
>>
>
>Haven't you done enough damage in other groups?  Why don't leave us alone?
>When you discuss what goes on in a LDS Temple, it hurts.  Do I come into
>your church and urinate on the alter? No.  Christ would defile what others
                                                        ^- not
>found sacred. Follow His example.
>

Just wanted to correct the typo.  The first time a person defiled what
LDS members hold sacred, most of the meaningful discussions would end.
I respect other Christians, all I ask is the same.

>Shalom,
>
>Brian
>
>PS: Nauvoo, Carthage, USENET ....  NOT!!!
>-- 
>Brian R. Beeler                     bu951@po.cwru.edu        
>GEIS/GEnie: beeler.b@monet         beeler@cc.utah.edu
>"What a long, strange trip it's been" - Grateful Dead
>
-- 
Brian R. Beeler                     bu951@po.cwru.edu        
GEIS/GEnie: beeler.b@monet         beeler@cc.utah.edu
"What a long, strange trip it's been" - Grateful Dead
From: fms@sw.stratus.com (Faith Senie)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.outdoors.orienteering
Date: 21 Jan 1993 17:02:49 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: hoop.sw.stratus.com

Hey, wow, an orienteering newsgroup would be great!  I learned about orienteering
at a kayaking symposium (of all places) last summer, and have not heard anything
about any orienteering activity in my area since then.  This would be a great way
to find out more about the sport, and find out if there is any activity in my
area.  Consider me in favor of the group!

Faith

-- 
Faith M. Senie            InterNet: fms@vos.stratus.com
Stratus Computer, Inc.    InterNet: fms@hoop.sw.stratus.com
55 Fairbanks Blvd.       Pkt Radio: n1jit@ka1srd.ma.usa.na
Marlboro, MA 01752           Phone: (508)460-2632

"I'm afraid I don't know very much about Romulan Disruptor settings" --Spock
From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Geoff Bronner)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.mac.powerbook
Date: 24 Jan 93 15:55:21 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Organization: Amos Tuck School
Disclaimer: I don't represent Dartmouth and Dartmouth doesn't represent me.

In <1jppl6INNdhp@stimpy.css.itd.umich.edu> kwun@css.itd.umich.edu (Michael Kwun) writes:

>There are 400,000+ PBs out there.  There are about 9000 Outbounds out
>there.  The Duos *are* powerbooks--mine sez PowerBook Duo 210.

And every single portable macintosh computer ever made by Apple Computer
will have "PowerBook" silk-screened on the front of it?

BULLSHIT. The PowerBook and the PowerBook Duo aren't even the same product
family. And that is just the beginning.

A newsgroup proposal based on a group name that will inevitably become
outmoded is STUPID.

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU - Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business
_____________________________________________________________________________
 Cerebus for Dictator in 1993!!    | "Responsibility is when someone can
     "Vote for me or else."        |  blame you if something goes wrong."
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: philipd@cs.kuleuven.ac.be (Philip Dutre)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.miniatures
Organization: Dept. Computerwetenschappen
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:33:05 GMT


I have some things to say about the recent discussion going on about r.g.m.:

1. It is clear that not all wargames are miniature games. Board wargaming does
exist, but has some distinct characteristics. Something along the lines
of rec.games.*.war is therefore not appropriate.

2. It is also clear that not all games that use miniatures are games that belong
in the class commonly known as "miniature games". E.g. games as Space Hulk (GW),
Heroquest (MB), The Dungeon (TSR) or even Monopoly use miniatures, although
they are definitly boardgames. The miniatures in these games are just there
for the visual appeal. If I played A3R, replacing each armoured division with
a miniature tank and each infantry division with an infantryman (a la A&A),
I would still have a boardgame, right?

3. Historical miniature games & fantasy miniature games have much more in
common with each other than with any other form of gaming, as are historical
boardgames & fantasy boardgames. Miniature games have related gaming mechanisms,
and that is what counts, because we're talking about games.

4. The collecting & painting of miniatures is an important part of the
"miniature games" hobby, but plays a secondary role. The most important thing
still is gaming. If this group wants to place this topic above the gaming
part, it should not be created in the games hierarchy. This does not imply
that these features cannot be discussed, but it implies that model railway
enthusiasts do not belong  in this group, although they "play" with
miniatures as well. The emphasis is on gaming, whether the game is WRG 7 or
Warhammer 4.

Therefore....

give the group another name:

rec.games.tabletop

This would reflect what is intended, forms a valuable cogroup for rec.games.board
and all miniature gaming will have its place here.

Additionaly, this doesn't exclude, but encourages discussions about painting
miniatures, making scenery, etc...


-- 
| Phil Dutre                            Dept. Computer Wetenschappen        |
| philipd@cs.kuleuven.ac.be             Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KUL)|
| Phone: (32) 16 201015 x3094/3552      Celestijnenlaan 200A                |
| Fax:   (32) 16 205308                 B-3001 Heverlee, BELGIUM            |



-- 
| Phil Dutre                            Dept. Computer Wetenschappen        |
| philipd@cs.kuleuven.ac.be             Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KUL)|
| Phone: (32) 16 201015 x3094/3552      Celestijnenlaan 200A                |
| Fax:   (32) 16 205308                 B-3001 Heverlee, BELGIUM            |
From: sharonc@meaddata.com (Sharon Crichton)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: RENAME several groups to rec.outdoors.*
Date: 25 Jan 1993 14:07:54 GMT
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Distribution: na
Reply-To: sharonc@meaddata.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: nochovies.meaddata.com

In article <1993Jan25.071531.28626@zia.aoc.nrao.edu>, dbriggs@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Daniel Briggs) writes:
|> In article <1jvvolINNeq1@rodan.UU.NET>
|>   Tim Rigg <rigg@osnome.che.wisc.edu> writes:
|> >In addition, obvious outdoors.* groups should be moved to that
|> >hierarchy.  Specially, rec.hunting should be moved.  Other
|> >possibilities include
|> >[...]
|> >rec.skydiving
|> 
|> Thanks for the consideration, but I'd rather that we stay where we are.
|> rec.outdoors implies to me a sport where the primary motivation is a love
|> of the outdoors, rather than a sport which is incidentally practiced
|> outdoors.  The latter seems to me a rather pointless distinction.  No
|> offense intended, but I think that we have more in common with
|> rec.foods.beer than rec.outdoors.hunting.

Ditto from me on rec.scuba - just because scuba diving is practiced
outdoors does not seem to be much of a motivation to re-subgroup it.
Plus the fact that this came completely out of the blue, at least as
far as I know - there wasn't any concern in rec.scuba that we may have
been in the wrong part of the hierarchy.

Clear up the problems (if any exist) with rec.backcountry, but leave
the other groups where they are.

-- 
Sharon Crichton         *****************   Mead Data Central
sharonc@meaddata.com    **HAPPY! HAPPY!**   P.O. Box 933
uunet!meaddata!sharonc  **  JOY! JOY!  **   Dayton, OH 45401
                        *****************   FAX: (513) 865-1655
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: rec.outdoors.* is a stupid idea
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 04:26:22 GMT

Top ten reasons to support rec.outdoors.*:

1.  (Well, this is all we really need.)  Joel Furr doesn't like it.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: wisehart@witchcraft.com (Dan Wisehart)
Subject: Is it out there - comp.binaries.ms-windows?
Organization: Computer Witchcraft, Inc., SF, CA
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 18:14:30 GMT

Can anyone tell me if c.b.m is out there yet?  The c.b.i.p
asked me to post a program there.  TIA  :-)
From: stanley@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: rec.arts.startrek.reviews moderated
Date: 27 Jan 1993 18:41:57 GMT
Organization: Coastal Imaging Lab, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: ruby.oce.orst.edu

In article <C1It8D.CKw@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU writes:
>The point is, I'm happy to read reviews in other groups. 

And I am happy to read aviation discussions in r.a.s.m. There is a
group specifically created for them, however, and that is why they
shouldn't be cross-posted to r.a.s.m.

>But I understand
>that some people want to read just the reviews and nothing else.

That is why a .reviews group should be created. Then there will be one
specific group for people who want to read reviews.

But don't stop there -- by not mandating crossposting, you can help
those who don't want to see them.

>And there is a reason. Some people want to read reviews and only reviews.

This is not a reason to crosspost every review. This is a reason to
create .reviews. There is no reason to mandate crossposting.
From: mellon@ncd.com (Ted Lemon)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.mac.powerbook
Date: 24 Jan 93 23:01:59 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Network Computing Devices, Inc.
In-reply-to: labccc@emory.edu's message of 21 Jan 93 00:35:13 GMT


I'm definitely in favour of creating a comp.sys.mac.powerbook
newsgroup - I too get tired of sifting through the other Mac stuff,
since I don't personally own a mac other than my PowerBook.

			       _MelloN_
--
mellon@ncd.com						uunet!lupine!mellon
Member of the League for Programming Freedom.   To find out how software
patents may cost you your right to program, contact lpf@uunet.uu.net
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: New RFD: Bible Study Newsgroup
Date: 22 Jan 93 00:45:36 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

shl0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (Samson H. Lee) writes:

>In article <1993Jan20.165349.26269@pdn.paradyne.com>, nelson@paradyne.com (Bill Nelson) writes:
>>...
>>    The duties of the moderator are as follows:
[deleted]

>Is a moderator really necessary?  Sure does sound like a lot of work.
Absolutely.  If you have seen how scriptural "discussions" take place in
talk.religion.misc, they usually turn into flame wars, name calling, etc.
It's almost impossible to carry on a rational discussion.

>Unless several moderators are available, there could be a very long
>backlog of articles and a slow rate of posting.  Most moderated groups
>show about a dozen or so articles a day max.  Until the group caught
>on, people would probably lose interest pretty quickly.
The moderator of soc.religion.christian handles about 30 messages a day and
this seems to work pretty well...my postings usually show up within 1 day,
2 at the most.

>Responding to each rejected posting could be tedious too.  If this is
>to be a discussion group, then make it so.  Most groups seem to weed
>out extraneous material by ignoring the comments or writing personally
>to person involved.
Not always...witness attempts to carry on rational discussion in ANY
discussion groups...there are very few successful ones.  Responding to
rejected postings will not take too much time, by my calculations and
the number of postings that will be low.

>The generation of a FAQ may not be warranted until recurrent themes
>develop.  What sort of themes do you anticipate?  Aren't there books
>already written on most subjects?  Perhaps a book list covering
>different subjects would be appropriate for the FAQ.  Anyway, a
>moderator is not required for compiling and submitting a FAQ.
True enough.  But certain things will be covered in the FAQ.  Lists of
the canonical books, general terms for usage in the group, lists of
references, dating systems.  Sure, the books are available, but why
shouldn't the info be available on line?

>So, the idea for the group is great, but the mechanism doesn't seem
>appropriate.  That's my $0.02 worth.

It seems to be the best way to carry on rational discussions and teaching.

 -Steve
--
  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                         -------------------
   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558
From: dsc@sys.uea.ac.uk (Dave Cartwright)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re : comp.sys.mac.powerbook
Date: 23 Jan 93 16:59:42 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: CMP, SYS, UEA, Norwich

In article <1jm2l5INNnok@gabrieli.cs.unc.edu>, welchg@cs.unc.edu (Gregory
Welch) wrote:
> 
> I would *love* to see such a news group formed!  On several occassions I
> have run into software problems that turned out to be problems only on the
> Powerbooks, due to sleeping, awakening, etc.  It would be nice to have a
> source of discussion/advice regarding such problems (& features, etc.)

Abdolutely. I also would like to see this group happen ...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|          Dave Cartwright, CMP Sector Network Administrator          |
|  Snail : School of Information Systems, UEA, Norwich, UK, NR4 7TJ.  |
| EMail : dsc@sys.uea.ac.uk              Smellingbone : (0603) 592610 |
|     "Reality is an illusion brought on by lack of alcohol ..."      |
|        ... all this is off my own back. Not UEA's. So there.        |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: This latest r.a.s.* split
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
	<1993Jan21.115755.19616@husc3.harvard.edu>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:53:51 GMT

cs> == christopher stone <cstone@husc8.harvard.edu>

 cs> OK, but the same objection also applies to reviews: eventually both
 cs> ds9 and tng will go off the air, perhaps ten years from now, and
 cs> you'll still get a defunct newsgroup.

Books?  Movies?  Comics?  Pewter sculptures of DS9?  Reviews are not just
for episodes...
--
 * Christopher Davis * <ckd@eff.org> * <ckd@kei.com> * [CKD1] * MIME * RIPEM *
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: New RFD: Bible Study Newsgroup
Date: 21 Jan 93 15:10:33 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

mjsmith@cac.washington.edu (Martha Smith ) writes:

>I understand the concerns about including the word "christian" in the 
>biblestudy charter ... christian and jewish views should be equally 
>acceptable.  And in the same way that pseudo-canonical christian works are 
admitted as peripheral discussions item, so should the Talmud/Midrash texts 
>of the Jewish tradition.
I agrre one hundred percent.  The initial moderator (me) will NOT exclude
references to Talmud/Midrash, or other Jewish works.  These are very
important to gain a perspective of what the transmitters of the texts
thought of them.

Of course, the moderator is going to have to add some Talmudic/Midrashic
texts to his library so he can look stuff up as necessary...any
suggestions?  My church has some, but I'd like to get some of my own...

 -Steve
--
  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                         -------------------
   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558
From: allen%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Allen Sanderson)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: RENAME several groups to rec.outdoors.*
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:41:19 GMT
Organization: University of Utah Computer Science

Tim Rigg <rigg@osnome.che.wisc.edu> writes:

>There is some discussion in rec.backcountry about creating a camping
>subgroup.  If such a group is created, it should be placed in the
>rec.outdoors. hierarchy which currently contains just
>rec.outdoors.fishing.

>Second, should rec.backcountry be renamed and modified to include
>subgroups?  It seems that splitting rec.backcountry might be a good
>idea.  But, where to split the group is quite another debate.
>Possibilities include:
>
>rec.outdoors.camping
>rec.outdoors.backpacking
>rec.outdoors.hiking


I strongly believe that creating such subgroups is not necessary.  and
would further clutter up the newsgroups.  For instance, lets say someone
would like to get some info on boots.  They are probably going to
cross post it to many of the news groups listed above, thus
generating unwanted posts.  Also, much of the discussion that goes on
in rec.backcountry pertains to all aspect of the backcountry which
includes camping (car and tent), hiking, backpacking, skiing
(backcountry naturally), a little climbing, plus some other misc
stuff.  I have not heard complaints from people that things are too
cluttered.

Creating a hierarchy is also not necessary.  For instance, swimming takes
place in both open water and in pools (which may be indoors or
outdoors).  So do we need to have three groups for that ?  This is an
extreme example but the point is where do we draw the limit.
Personally I prefer the simpler the better.  Especially since most
people naturally associate backcountry activities with the outdoors.
On the other hand things like rec.autos.* is reasonable since
there are many different interests in automobiles.

Also, I can easily see moving rec.outdoors.fishing to rec.fishing.

My vote on this would be two no's (hierarchy and subgroups).

On side note which I believe has been discussed before is that I would
love to see rec.skiing split into two groups

rec.skiing.alpine (downhill)
rec.skiing.nordic (X-country)

For me the S/N ratio is too high for my particular interest (nordic
skiing) and as such I turned it off.

Cheers,

Allen R. Sanderson

Salt Lake City, Oootah


"Great spirits have always encounter violent opposition from
mediocre minds."
	- Albert Einstein