HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: zahin@occs.cs.oberlin.edu (Kazi Zahin S. Hasan)
Subject: Re: CFV: soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya moderated
	<ZAHIN.92Nov14222047@occs.cs.oberlin.edu>
	<1e4gm1INNhg4@CURIE.SYSTEMSY.CS.YALE.EDU>
Organization: Oberlin College Computer Science
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:23:25 GMT
X-Posted-From: occs.cs.oberlin.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1e4gm1INNhg4@CURIE.SYSTEMSY.CS.YALE.EDU> ahmed-shakil@cs.yale.edu (Shakil Waiz Ahmed) writes:

>  So tell me, if I declared myself a prophet and claimed I was the
>  *last* prophet and started my own sect, do you think the Ahmadiyas would
>  accept that as a part of Islam?  And if I started my own mosque here
>  in New Haven for this new faith, would you pray beside me?

If your hypothetical "shakilist" sect satisfied the following
conditions, then I would be consider its devotees to be Muslims.
Note that the beliefs of the Ahamdia sect do not contradict any of
these. 

1.	The faith must contain some, if not all, of the
humanitarianism which I believe is essential to Islam. 	If you
postulated that any group of people - whether "shakilist" or "heretic",
whether male or female - should be denied any of their human rights, I
would keep my distance.

2.	The faith must not be dogmatic. It must allow, as does Islam,
its believers the use of their judgement. 

3.	Lastly, and least important: the faith must be monotheistic,
and must acknowledge Muhammad as *a* prophet of God.

Note that I would be willing to pray with any person for whose
religion (1) and (2) are true. However, i would not consider them
Muslims unless (3) were also true.

>  How about a CFV for soc.religion.islam.Zahin? ;)

How flattering. :) But why give me undue credit? I think
soc.religion.islam.spirituality would more than fit the bill.

--
Zahin Hasan
zahin@occs.cs.oberlin.edu
(216) 774 2466
OCMR box 1551
Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio 44074
				

	When a stupid man is doing something he's ashamed of, he always 
declares that it is his duty.

                                  George Bernard Shaw
From: rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Is there a general fault-tolerance news group?
Date: 18 Nov 1992 17:14:32 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx
NNTP-Posting-Host: crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu
Keywords: fault tolerance

In article <1992Nov18.131831.8876@eecs.nwu.edu>, ian@nasser.eecs.nwu.edu (Ian Sutherland) writes:
> 
> Unless comp.arch has changed a lot since the last time I tuned in, it
> would be just as peripheral to comp.arch, if not more.  I'll just
> repeat: a lot of fault tolerance takes place above the architecture
> level.  If we're going to discuss this, it should include other groups
> than just those devoted to architecture.  Likewise for the name of any
> group formed.

But this depends on your definition of architecture. Currently, comp.arch
does seem to consist primarily of discussion at the hardware leevel but my
definition of architecture is much broader; architecture is the subject of
how a particular class of systems works and under this definition then 
comp.arch would be the logical place. I do agree that it would probably
be lost in the current threads that inhabit comp.arch but as a place for the
group it works. The more I think about it the more I do agree that the 
GROUP comp.arch would be inappropriate since nay discussion would be submerged
but since there is no central place for this type of subject then a new
group would be appropriate and I do believe that 

	comp.arch.fault-tol 

is the appropriate name. We went through a similar discussion on the storage
group and eventually decided to create it as comp.arch.storage for the same
reasons I have indicated here. The group would be about the principles, design
and use of fault tolerant systems which describes an architecture to me. I
would not oppose a comp.fault-tol but do believe it is better here.

-- 
Richard H. Miller                 Email: rick@bcm.tmc.edu
Asst. Dir. for Technical Support  Voice: (713)798-3532
Baylor College of Medicine        US Mail: One Baylor Plaza, 302H
                                           Houston, Texas 77030
From: andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Andrew Hackard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Dave Hayes may be right (was Re: To keep the r.m.s rename...)
Summary: In which Andrew bends an analogy to the breaking point...
Date: 20 Nov 92 21:10:47 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:

>Are you going to blame a 5 year old kid for crossing the street and
>getting hit when the crossing was done on a red light?

I'm rather amused that you're comparing Joe Average User to a 5 year old,
but I'll do my best to submerge that while I extend the analogy.

Certainly the parent(s) (== sysads) should have been there to watch over
the 5yo kid.  That's a dereliction of duty on the part of the parents.
However, that doesn't change the fact that nearly all parents (and most
likely exactly all parents) tell their kids over and over not to cross
against the light.  This is like sysads telling their users over and over
(or even just once, because users aren't generally 5yo's) where to find
help.

This is where the analogy breaks down -- users aren't 5 years old, and
sysads aren't parents.  They simply cannot be there all the time for
every user.  Yes, there ARE sysads out there who hand their users a sheet
of paper with a user number, a password, and nothing else but a pat on
the back.  This doesn't change the fact that users are fully capable of
taking initiative on their own.

--
--Andrew Hackard                                 If I spoke for UT, this post
  andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu                        would make even less sense.
From: grego@bit.UUCP (Greg Sanguinetti)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.solid-state.electronics
Date: 16 Nov 92 18:34:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: bit.488
Reply-To: grego@bit.UUCP (Greg Sanguinetti)
Organization: BIT  Portland, OR

In article <BxnGI5.FD5@uunet.uu.net> sehari@iastate.edu (Babak Sehari) writes:
>discussion on creation of sci.solid-state.electronics is being ...
>Please, post your support for creation of this newsgroup and any comments

Yes, I support the creation of the proposed newsgroup and would vote
for it in a general CFV's.

-grego
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grego Sanguinetti, Bipolar Integrated Technology | Water, water everywhere,
grego@bit.uucp or grego%bit%ogi.cse.edu          | but I'd rather drink
or bit!grego@ogi.cse.edu or ...!ogicse!bit!grego | beer.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff & Nonsense Division
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:26:08 GMT

In article <21886@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:

>In article <BxDttn.1B1@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>
>>>If you scan  
>>>several hundred messages a day would YOU notice a CFV if it didn't look  
>>>like it was for your group?
>>
>>I would and I do.
>
>I find it so incredibly insulting that you would suggest everyone on
>the net wade through this newsgroup just to prevent some re-org freak
>(have we all forgotten K*nt Paul Dolan so quickly?) from running amok?

Did I?  Learn to read, Haugh.

(In fact, learn to write.  Was that a question?  A statement?  A
sentence?  Where was the predicate?  An object, Senator, we need an
object ....)

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom)
Subject: Re: rec.music.makers.*: chronology and comments from the vote-taker.
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 19:14:17 GMT
Organization: IBM Research

In article <BxsJHx.E15@unix.amherst.edu>, twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov15.215611.47609@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:
|> 
|> >In article <BxoIMw.IJ@unix.amherst.edu>, twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
|> >
|> >|> In article <1992Nov13.164753.35047@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:
|> >|> 
|> >|> >I think that multiple unrelated votes should
|> >|> >not be on a single call-for-votes and ballot.
|> >|> 
|> >|> Part of the stickiness of this issue arises from the fact that the
|> >|> votes *were* related: they were part of a concerted effort to draw
|> >|> together several related groups spread throughout Usenet and altnet
|> >|> into a single, more logical hierarchy.
|> >
|> >Part of the stickiness of this issue arises from the fact that
|> >your above argument is circular:  your judgement that the
|> >votes/groups were related presupposes that people would have
|> >voted "yes" had they known about the vote.
|> 
|> No, it doesn't.  That's a completely unrelated issue.
|> 
What I meant was that one of the reasons that some of us
voted "no" or would have voted "no" was that they
felt that the groups being merged into a single
hierarchy were not related.

By using their relatedness as justification for putting
them on a single ballot, you are presuming that these
particular "no" voters were wrong and that they were
known to be wrong before the vote.

|> >|> While posting additional notices to each affected group individually
|> >|> is an excellent idea, and I think one that should be employed more
|> >|> often, how would that part of the process be controlled?
|> >
|> >It's not clear that you'd have to monitor it.  It's self-monitoring.
|> >If the guidelines aren't followed, somebody's going to complain.
|> 
|> When?  After the vote?  Seems to me we've been on *that* bus before.

The complaint could be made at any time, either before or after the
vote.

The only reason I'm not supporting Dave Hayes' complaint is that
the vote was valid according to the present guidelines.

Had my suggested guidelines been in effect, and had the same
CFV nevertheless been issued with the same result, I think Dave's complaint
would then be valid.  Presumably those people who today are
arguing the guidelines as a reason for demanding that the vote
should stand would in the new situation be arguing the new guidelines
as a reason for invalidating the vote.



-- 
Rob Strom, strom@watson.ibm.com, (914) 784-7641
IBM Research, 30 Saw Mill River Road, P.O. Box 704, Yorktown Heights, NY  10598
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: adc@tardis.msu.edu (Alan D. Cabrera)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Reply-To: adc@tardis.msu.edu
Organization: Michigan State University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 18:45:37 GMT

In article 2@cs.cmu.edu, hill@norman.VI.RI.CMU.EDU (Robert Hill) writes:
> 
> Ok...concerning the rec.games.netrek reorganization, I find there is  
> neither the need nor the desire for such a reorganization to take place.   
> The matter should rightfully be discussed, but I think you will find that  
> most readers of rec.games.netrek would disagree with such a  
> reorganization.  No one who has posted here have agreed that this is  
> needed nor desired, while there are many people who has posted general  
> disagreement with the proposal.  

Agreed.

> I would assume that relatively few people want the reorganization at the  
> current time.  Even fewer people would vote for the reorganization in its  
> current state.
> 
> My recommendation is for alan to scrap the idea and to discuss possible  
> future reorganizations on rec.games.netrek to see what the readers want  
> out of rec.games.netrek, instead of assuming that his idea is the  
> mainstream.

Where do I say that my idea is mainstream?  As I told you via personal
email I posted the RFD, request for DISCUSSION, because I wanted to
discuss the idea.  I tried to discuss it on r.g.n and all I got was
some flippant answers and a recomendation that if I was serious to post
an RFD; so I did, after several positive email responses for the
split.  I don't understand why everyone is taking this so personally.

Actually, this is taking on quite comical proportions...  


---
Alan Cabrera				internet:  adc@tardis.cl.msu.edu
Computer Laboratory			phone:     (517) 353-3027
Michigan State University		fax:       (517) 353-9847
514 Computer Center			bitnet:    CABRERA@MSU
East Lansing, MI 48824

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: ksdavis@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Karleen S. Davis)
Subject: Documentation Ideas 
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 21:08:06 GMT

Concerning the suggested "User's Guide," stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU
(John Stanley) writes: 
>
>How, pray tell, would you include the information on how to vote in such
>a manual, when the actual "how to vote" information differs for each and
>every vote? What email address would you put in your manual as the place
>to send votes? What format would you tell people to use for the vote?

I have many ideas for the User's Guide that will handle the diversity
of newsgroup voting opportunities.  The point of the document is not
to tell people the "how to vote" information that is specific to each
vote, but rather to deal with other issues, like. . .

What's an RFD/CFV?  (Summary; description aimed at uninitiated users)

Who creates newsgroups?  (Summary; admins do, upon receiving control
	messages from tale, who in turn gleans his info from the
	voting system initiated by users, to be explained later)

Cool! How do I do it?  (Summary; reference to the companion document 
	"How To Create. . .", suggestion to become familiar with process 
	before attempting it, maybe a *brief* rundown of the timeline)

Why are groups created/reorganized/renamed, why does the discussion go
on in news.groups and not in my newsgroup, what do "no" votes mean
(since this is an unresolved issue, it will be presented as such). . . 

. . .and other stuff that hasn't occured to me yet.  In short, I
believe there's good reason to remove the rules from the theory
(remember, the User's Guide is supposed to be aimed at new users so
they know what a vote is when they're hit by one).  


-sz
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Dave Hayes may be right (was Re: To keep the r.m.s rename...)
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:18:20 GMT
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA


>> Are you going to blame a 5 year old kid for crossing the street and
>> getting hit when the crossing was done on a red light?
>Bad analogy.  Or do you regard Usenet users as children?

Well now...that's a tough one to answer. 

>Are you going to blame a 35 year old adult for crossing the street and
>getting hit when the crossing was done on a red light?
>To use a delightful Americanism, damn straight I am.

Now, in California (where I live) the 35 year old is NOT to blame. Pedestrians
have the right-of-way whereever they are. 

Got you.

Now if some 35 year old ran directly in front of your car in California,
wouldn't you appreciate some protest system for the law that says that
peds always have the right of way?
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

 What bread looks like depends upon whether you are hungry or not.
From: murphy@npri6.npri.com (David P. Murphy)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: going for an all-time high in "hyperbole"
Date: 22 Nov 92 18:36:16 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: NPRI, Alexandria VA

>Uninformed => not allowed a vote => ostracized.
>
>dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)

please stick to english.  "uninformed" means the user did not know of the vote
or did not know how to vote.  "not allowed" means that someone prevented the
person from voting.  THESE ARE TWO DIFFERENT SITUATIONS, and only the former
is true.  NO ONE can prevent users from voting on a net-wide scope (of course
a sysadmin can prevent any of _his_ users, but that's a tangent i'll ignore).

what you meant was that many users did not vote because of ignorance,
which in turn was caused because, in your opinion, the description of the net
is not as easily accessible as it should be.

your jump to the adjective "ostracized" is even worse, because people
*will* find the group under its new name and *will* continue to post
and therefore be heard.

this one line is helping you to quickly achieve a level of hyperbole
from which your reputation will take years to recover.

ok
dpm
-- 
murphy@npri6.npri.com 602 Cameron St. Alexandria, VA 22314 (703) 683-9090

              When every one is dead the Great Game is finished.  Not before.
                              --- Hurree Babu, "Kim"
From: jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.music.makers.*: chronology and comments from the vote-taker.
Date: 19 Nov 1992 23:57:56 GMT
Organization: AS&M Inc
	<1992Nov15.215611.47609@watson.ibm.com> <BxsJHx.E15@unix.amherst.edu>
	<1992Nov17.191417.34759@watson.ibm.com>
Reply-To: J Lee Jaap <J.L.Jaap@larc.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cmb00.larc.nasa.gov
In-reply-to: strom@Watson.Ibm.Com's message of Tue, 17 Nov 92 19:14:17 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.191417.34759@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:

   The only reason I'm not supporting Dave Hayes' complaint is that
   the vote was valid according to the present guidelines.

   Had my suggested guidelines been in effect, and had the same
   CFV nevertheless been issued with the same result, I think Dave's complaint
   would then be valid.  Presumably those people who today are
   arguing the guidelines as a reason for demanding that the vote
   should stand would in the new situation be arguing the new guidelines
   as a reason for invalidating the vote.

Yes!!!!!!  (MHO only)
--
J Lee Jaap <J.L.Jaap@LaRC.NASA.Gov> +1 804/864-2148
    employed by, not speaking for, AS&M Inc, at
         NASA LaRC, Hampton VA 23681-0001
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Dave Hayes may be right (was Re: To keep the r.m.s rename...)
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:20:03 GMT
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA

rorschak@daimi.aau.dk (Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
>dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>>By the way, no one can make you angry without your consent. 
>I have tried to install my emotionel life in order to make it pop
>up a requester everytime I was going to be angry:
>But it doesn't work. How do you do it?

Lots of years of practice. (It helped to realize exactly what anger was.)

But the biggest place I learned this is...RIGHT here in news.groups. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Fool (n.) - 1. A person trying to be honest with the dishonest.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:16:55 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.044736.9753@midway.uchicago.edu> djb6@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>Why strive for a hair-splitting definitive division between "science
>fiction" and "fantasy"?  In general, a user looking at these groups
>will have a fairly good idea what genre of fiction is expected in the
>group.

The trouble is there are many such users looking at these groups, and they will
all have fairly good ideas which all conflict with one another.
--
"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,news.admin
From: randall-joshua@yale.edu (Joshua Randall)
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Organization: Yale University Science & Engineering UNIX(tm), New Haven, CT 06520-2158
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:54:14 GMT

In article <7B8SBVBD@cc.swarthmore.edu> hildebra@math.wisc.edu (Jeff Hildebrand) writes:

[deletion]

>	The more complicated situation is with longer ballots. A suggestion
>I saw made which made a lot of sense to me was this: On a longer ballot
>which is going to effect several groups, make a short post to each group
>affected, summarizing the effect on that group and including pointers to the
>original RFD and the explanitory articles in news.announce.newusers.

I've said this before, I'll say it again.  Who decides which groups
are affected?  This will lead to the same problem we have now:  people
claiming they never saw the vote because nothing was said about it in
their group.

-- 
Joshua E. Randall                       randall-joshua@yale.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: question: how do we stop this?
From: adc@tardis.msu.edu (Alan D. Cabrera)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 01:41:40 GMT
Reply-To: adc@tardis.msu.edu
Organization: Michigan State University

In article 21821@reed.edu, horde@reed.edu (Mr. Heiji Horde) writes:
> In article <1992Nov13.191116.19596@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> adc@tardis.msu.edu writes:
> >Why do you feel so threatened by this RFD?  Really, if no one is
> >interested they'll just vote it down.
>
> BTW, you didn't need to send me a copy of those rules, I've gone through
>   several newsgroup reorganizations. Then there's also my job...
>
> 	-Heiji

Sorry, if I knew you were so insecure I would have been more careful.
I'm sure that you're a very good "(Unix Systems Programmer, Reed College)".


---
Alan Cabrera				internet:  adc@tardis.cl.msu.edu
Computer Laboratory			phone:     (517) 353-3027
Michigan State University		fax:       (517) 353-9847
514 Computer Center			bitnet:    CABRERA@MSU
East Lansing, MI 48824

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: Re: Is Dave Hayes wasting your tax dollars?
Keywords: waste in government
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 01:48:59 GMT

I don't believe that Hayes is wasting money, but I have to ask these questions:

Do you wish to lodge a formal complaint?
			^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you willing to testify in front of a Court-of-Law?  You understand
that you will likely undergo cross-examination?

I am not kidding.

Please explain to ME what aspect of his policy you believe him to
be wasting dollars.

JPL (I am an ex-employee of Caltech, from there) is run by Caltech,
it is a US Government installation, and their contract gets reviewed
every five years.  It is a simple matter to report to the
Inspector General of NASA.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Resident Cynic, Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Second Favorite email message: Returned mail: Cannot send message for 3 days
A Ref: Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, vol. 1, G. Polya
Newsgroups: news.groups