HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nsw@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Neil Weinstock)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.music.makers.* groups
Organization: The Flying Squid Patrol
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 06:25:26 GMT

In article <BtpH40.2Mx@uunet.uu.net> rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) writes:
>Introduction: There are several newsgroups in the alt.* hierarchy which
>are utilized for the discussion of various musical instruments.  The traffic
>in these groups and the degree of participation from posters to the
>rec.music.* groups indicate that it might be time to consider shifting
>these groups to rec.music.makers, creating another group, and renaming
>an existing group.
[ ... ]
>Proposal E: Rename rec.music.synth to rec.music.makers.keyboards
>Charter: "Synthesizer, sampler, and other keyboard techniques and equipment"
>
>	There are two reasons for this.  The reason for moving the group
>	is to place it under rec.music.makers, along with all of the
>	other newsgroups specifically designed for the discussion of
>	instruments and techniques.  The reason for renaming the group
>	is to reflect the change in its contents: when rec.music.synth
>	was created, the focus was nearly exclusively on synthesizers.
>	The discussion has now broadened to include samplers, organs,
>	pianos, and other keyboard instruments.

I have no problem moving the group under the rec.music.makers hierarchy,
but I see no reason to rename from .synth to .keyboards.  In fact, the
discussion routinely includes much more than keyboards.  All manner of musical
electronics and synthesis are covered, including computers and software,
electronic drums, guitar synthesis, alternate controllers, etc.  I think
that while .synth might not be the perfect name, it captures the essence of
the group much better than .keyboards.

I also wonder if this is the right time to again bring up the idea of a
.marketplace group, presumably rec.music.makers.marketplace.  When the
r.m.m hierarchy expands (assuming the proposals pass), it will start to
get confusing where "forsale" posts should go.  I think the idea for this
group has been rejected in the past, but what the heck.

 __ _ _ _ _ _,--------------------------------------------------. _ _ _ _ _ _ 
/, \ \ \ \ \ \  Neil Weinstock @ AT&T Bell Labs, Liberty Corner  \ \ \ \ \ \ \
 | | | | | | |     believer in the horrendous space kablooie     | | | | | |
 \_/_/_/_/_/_/        att!edsel!nsw or nsw@edsel.att.com         /_/_/_/_/_/
             `--------------------------------------------------'
From: gritton@alaska.et.byu.edu (Jamie Gritton)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.org.lpf.news moderated, comp.org.lpf.talk
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:04:12 GMT
Reply-To: gritton@byu.edu
Organization: Brigham Young University, Provo UT USA

Jyrki Kuoppala <jkp@cs.hut.fi> writes:

> This is a request for discussion regarding creation of two newsgroups
> for discussions and announcements on and of the League for Programming
> Freedom.

> comp.org.lpf.news	News from the League for Programming Freedom
> comp.org.lpf.talk	Discussions relevant to the LPF

   While there is a definite need for an LPF newsgroup, I don't see
the point in having two. comp.org.eff.* and (the proposed)
comp.org.acad-freedom.* have two groups because the original groups
did. The closest thing to an original LPF newsgroup is
gnu.misc.discuss, only one group. Is there someone at the LPF that
wants this group and would actually moderate it and post official
announcements. I'd need at least that assurance before voting in a
moderated group.
--
James Gritton - gritton@byu.edu - I disclaim
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: rduggar@access.digex.com (robin of riverdale)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 14:17:54 GMT

Why not just plain rec.arts.blake7 or alt.tv.blakes7?

Neil, thank you for the voice of clarity and reason!

-- 
Lady Robin of Riverdale

"Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for the
   appointment of the corrupt few"
From: rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.babylon5
Date: 29 Aug 1992 00:18:23 GMT

In article <BtpH2r.2J0@uunet.uu.net>, techy@iastate.edu (Troy A Rutter) writes:
> This is a call for discussion on the creation of the new newsgroup
> rec.arts.sf.babylon5.
> 
> Babylon 5 is a new Science Fiction television program that is being
> produced by Warner Brothers domestic television, and will be
> premiering this fall or early next year.

Several comments:


1) The name should be rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5 since it is a TV show.

2) I really do not see why a new group is needed at this time since the show
is not even on and the existing group rec.arts.sf.tv should serve with no
problem. 

-- 
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: cm@ariel.its.unimelb.EDU.AU (Charles Meo)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: RFD: comp.sys.solbourne
Date: 31 Aug 92 15:18:07 GMT
Organization: Solbourne Computer Australia

OK, what is the sentiment out there on this? I think such a newsgroup is
justified on several grounds:

1. These systems are _not_ suns and there are enough differences to warrant
a separate forum. I am thinking here of hardware issues in particular. This
may evolve as Solbourne users discover their own group. So far I don't see
much in the Sun groups.

There are software differences too, SMP, SVM, swm.

2. Many Solbourne users have made a conscious effort to choose something
differentiated from Sun and there is no reason to lump them back in there.

3. The bugfix cycle is different and this alone is a significant difference.

4. The product cycle is also different.

How about it? Any takers out there? I must say I'm surprised it doesn't
already exist.

Chuck
From: thornley@nano.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.games.strategic - how about perfect-info
Keywords: checkers, shogi, othello, hex, etc.
Date: 25 Aug 92 18:20:38 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.

In article <a_rubin.714754810@dn66> a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) writes:
>In <1992Aug25.082405.25272@ucthpx.uct.ac.za> tonyp@ucthpx.uct.ac.za (Tony Putman) writes:
>
>
>>[Suggests that the "strategy" games listed are games of perfect information
>> and no chance elements, and recommends the name rec.games.perfect-info.]
>
>Now that sounds like a definable difference....probably not one the
>original proponents would like, but definable.  (BTW, the usual
>definition of "games of perfect information" DOES allow chance moves, as
>long as they are made in sequence and all players are informed in the
>result (Monopoly, Parchesi (sp?), etc.))  Dominoes, however, does not meet
>the definition.  (Nor is it a "board" game, precisely.)

By that definition, a lot of wargames are "games of perfect information"
- they have no hidden information, although they can depend heavily on
chance events.  Therefore, if this is the generally accepted meaning (I'm
not going to claim a meaning is generally accepted after all the folks who
seem to have missed the fact that "strategy" was originally a military
term, and is still strongly in use that way), it won't work.

For those who have been pushing "rec.games.strategy", are you interested
in games like Monopoly, dominoes, and various card games not covered by
groups?  If so, I still like "rec.games.abstract" or some version thereof.

DHT
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re:  soc.culture.indian.american and soc.culture.tamil
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 14:31:20 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia):
>In case of soc.culture.tamil we have people like K. Srinivasan (One of the
>organizers of the group along with the vote taker), Prem Kumar , Aruna
>Venkatachalam, Mr. Bazyar etc. doing the campaigning during the vote.

If the vote taker campaigned during the vote, PRESENT EVIDENCE that
this occurred.

As for the rest, if they're not vote collectors, they don't count.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
   "Do Rush place weird subliminal backmasked messages in their songs to
 compel unwilling geeks to commit evil .sig atrocities?"  -- Dean Engelhardt
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: whale@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stephen Schmidt)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.music.makers.* groups
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 18:57:40 GMT

In article <BtpH40.2Mx@uunet.uu.net> rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) writes:

>Question and answer time:
>
>Why not rec.music.makers.bass-guitar?

This question was raised when alt.guitar.bass was formed. The answer
is that upright bass, which is about half the players reading the newsgroup,
is in no way descended from guitar, and a bass guitar is descended more
directly from an upright bass than an electric guitar.
Putting bass guitar under guitar is not really any more sensible than
putting cellos under violins.

We proposed alt.bass for the alt group, but it was thought that name
was too short and might cause some confusion with other meanings
of the word "bass".

PROPOSAL: Call it rec.music.makers.bass. That shortens the name too.
I'm a bass player, so this is the group I care about...
>
>Aren't these names getting a bit long?
>
Is there a good reason that these have to go under rec.music.makers?
I presume there is, but I think that that's the part of the names that
people are seeing as excessive length.

-- 
Steve Schmidt			<><		   whale@leland.stanford.edu

"We have met the enemy and he is us" - Walt Kelly
From: birmingh@fnalo.fnal.gov
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.games.strategic controversy
Date: 28 Aug 92 19:58:08 GMT
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab


         I think a FAQ for rec.games.board should address the problem of
    people not knowing that rec.games.board is for all boardgames, not just
    wargames.

         If that is not the cause of the low non-wargame traffic, then
    there is no problem.

-- 
 Phillip J. Birmingham   birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov  
 I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough...
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.babylon5
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:55:57 GMT

I have to join in the prevailing sentiment here; r.a.sf.babylon5 is a very,
*very* premature action.  

Let's look at the three "single-issue" groups on SF media products currently
existing.  We've got:

rec.arts.startrek.*:  Star Trek has been around for 26 years and shows no 
signs of slacking off in terms of popularity.  There's a guaranteed long-term
base.

rec.arts.drwho:  Doctor Who has been around for almost *thirty* years, and 
only now, after 2-3 years of no show, is the group starting to slack off.

rec.arts.sf.starwars:  The Star Wars mythos has been around for fifteen 
years, and interest is actually jumping back *up* as a result of new books,
comics, etc., and the rumours of new films.

"Babylon 5" is simply not something with the base any of those groups can
claim.  

Use rec.arts.sf.tv.  Newgroup an alt.tv.babylon5 if you want.  But a rec
group is a bad idea and is likely not to pass.

Tim Lynch
From: bkottmann@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil (Brett Kottmann)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.diplomacy
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:47:10 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Logicon Technical Services, Inc.

In article <BtvJw8.JLz@uunet.uu.net>, nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca (Nick Fitzpatrick) writes:
> This is a Request For Discussion on the creation of a newsgroup for
> the Game of Diplomacy.
> 
> Group Name
> ----------
> 
> rec.games.diplomacy

	I think the group should be named rec.games.board.diplomacy.  Other
than that, I would have no objections.

Brett--------------------------------------------------------------------------
	"Why the courts don't tell a husband who has been living off his wife
to go out and get a job is beyond my comprehension."--Joan Lunden
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia)
Subject: Re: soc.culture.indian.american and soc.culture.tamil
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 21:02:15 GMT

In article <y5dnf=l@lynx.unm.edu>, lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) writes:
> alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia) writes:
> 
> >> You were vote taker at the time, and posted some messages asking for
> >> votes, the contents of which went against the spirit of the Usenet 
> >
> > What's so damn wrong in reminding people to cast their votes and hope 
> > them to vote favorably ? 
> 
> It's AGAINST THE RULES when YOU'RE the VOTE TAKER

USENET has NO rules, just guidelines. This is NOT against the guidelines
as has been pointed out in earlier discussion.

There is no mention in the guidelines explicitely forbidding it.

>, you PATHETIC SACK of BOWLING BALLS! 
> 
> PARK the SPIRIT OF THE NET up your RIGHT NOSTRIL and INHALE until it
> PIERCES YOUR BRAINPAN.  Oooops . . . TOO LATE!

You behave like a compu-nerd having lost touch with humanity ...
A visit to your friendly psychiatrist would help.

> Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)
> 
> "It's a party item, much like the TITANIC was."

"And it would sink like TITANIC, but will take you with it."

ciao,

Alok
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: newsnews@qedqcd.rye.ny.us (News Acct. 1)
Subject: misc.forsale.computers reorg
Organization: High Energy Concepts
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:25:35 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Summary: can we vote on this?
Keywords: rfd

Hi all,

	Here's a modified proposal - I think it captures most
	of what has been said so far:

	misc.forsale.computers.isa.systems
	misc.forsale.computers.isa.software
	misc.forsale.computers.apple.systems
	misc.forsale.computers.apple.software
	misc.forsale.computers.communications
	misc.forsale.computers.printers
	misc.forsale.computers.storage
	misc.forsale.computers.other
	misc.forsale.computers.d

	
A couple of points:

	1) we can abbreviate some of the names, however the longer
	   names might prevent some unnecessary cross postings;
	2) while there might be some printers/modems/disks that are
	   platform/hardware specific, the volume should be manageable.
	3) Its not clear that at this time we really need a .scsi;
	   (or do we?)
	4) The other group gets exactly that - other platforms, books,
	   manuals, etc.
	5) The .d group is for discussions - ie this guy ripped me off,
	   email was lost, this price is way too high etc.



	So how does it look?


Mike
From: fuzzy@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Fuzzy)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: all these MTB group comments
Date: 27 Aug 92 22:28:37 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

how about starting some sort of system where articles that apply only to
MTB-ing or road bikes could declare that in the subject....like:
        Subject: (MTB) balh blah blah
then folks can create the appropriate kill-file line and go on about
their business....and personally i'd kinda like to see the same thing 
for other common post-types....race results, help wanted and such....
i'm not much into race results, and it seems that people are always
posting them with different headers that my kill file can't catch....

just my thoughts...

Fuzzy
--
The other night I was lying in bed, looking up at the stars,
and I wondered..."Where the FUCK is my ROOF ?!?!!?"

fuzzy@sage.cc.purdue.edu
From: philg@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Philip Greenspun)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: r.b.mtb???????????????????????????????????
Date: 27 Aug 92 15:37:17 GMT
	<schinder.714879913@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: philg@martigny.ai.mit.edu
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab.
In-reply-to: schinder@leprss.gsfc.nasa.gov's message of 27 Aug 92 01:45:13 GMT


Hey, let's have one!
From: paigen@tfs.com (David Paigen)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: Removal of Unused Newsgroups
Date: 2 Sep 92 18:41:32 GMT
Organization: TRW Financial Systems

aryeh@cash.ucsc.edu (Aryeh Friedman) writes:

>                The Need for a Call for Removal (CFR)
>                        Procedure for UseNet:
>               Formal Proposal for New UseNet Guideline

I agree.  Our active file is over 1900 lines now, and 25% of those
groups are alt.groups.  A brief glance would imply that maybe a
quarter of these are 'joke' groups, like
	alt.american.automobile.breakdown.breakdown.breakdown
and
	alt.business.multi-level.scam.scam.scam.

I would love to get rid of these.  They just waste space.  No
traffic (here, at least).

----------------------->"Lay on, McDuff,    14th c. ideals in a 21st c. world
David Paigen            and damn'd be he        N: PLO Bush IRA CIA KKK
TRW Financial Systems   who first cries,        S: terrorism pipe bomb kill
paigen@tfs.com          'hold, enough!'"        A: assasination maim
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: asherman@laser.fmrco.com (Aaron Sherman)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.org.lpf.news moderated, comp.org.lpf.talk
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: I-Kinetics, 19 Bishop-Allen Dr., Cambridge, MA
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 13:59:46 GMT


>>>>> Jyrki Kuoppala <jkp@cs.hut.fi> said:

jkp> comp.org.lpf.news	News from the League for Programming Freedom
jkp> A moderated group containing announcements, news etc. from the LPF.

jkp> comp.org.lpf.talk	Discussions relevant to the LPF
jkp> An unmoderated group for discussions on the LPF and on topics relevant
jkp> to the goals of the LPF.

jkp> Previously there has been no good home for discussions on LPF and the
jkp> relevant issues.  The gnUsenet group gnu.misc.discuss has been used,
jkp> but this has created confusion since LPF isn't connected with GNU, FSF
jkp> or free software.

I think that this would be a VERY good idea! The LPF/GNU confusion is
getting to be fairly annoying.


			-AJS

--
--------
Disclaimer: I am solely responsible for the content of this message.
The views expressed here may not be the views of I-Kinetics, Fidelity,
any of the Fidelity-owned corporations or my mother.
From: nick@sunburn.waterloo.edu (Nick Fitzpatrick)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.abstract
Keywords: perfect-information deterministic strategic no-dice
Date: 28 Aug 92 14:18:10 GMT
Organization: University of Waterloo

In article <1992Aug28.131916.24508@sbcs.sunysb.edu> neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (Neil Bowers) writes:
>In article <BtnvEJ.83G@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> nick@sunburn.waterloo.edu (Nick Fitzpatrick) writes:
>>
>>So my problem with rec.games.abstract, is that Diplomacy would then be split
>>between 4 newsgroups, rather than just 3.
>
>rec.games.abstract will not be the place to discuss Diplomacy.
>Hopefully the group charter will make this clear enough.
>
I have read the RFD again, and again, and it seems to describe Diplomacy
to a tee, with the exception of the use of country names, and etc, there
is little connection to reality.  The game WAS afterall modelled on chess.
If diplomacy does not fit the description, I don't know what does.

Nick
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: kherron@ms.uky.edu (Kenneth Herron)
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.boycotts.announce moderated, misc.boycotts.misc
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 15:55:06 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences

Jyrki Kuoppala <jkp@cs.hut.fi> writes:

>misc.boycotts.announce	Announcements of boycotts. (Moderated)
>misc.boycotts.misc	Discussion on boycotts.

>An unmoderated group for discussions on boycotts not limited to those
>announced on misc.boycotts.announce, for theoretical discussions of
>boycotts in general, etc.

As someone else has noted, misc.boycotts.announce would be virtually
unworkable.  The poor sap^H^H^Hmoderator would probably be accused of
hidden agendas every time he rejected a post.

There are already groups devoted to activism, although they're mostly
in alt rather than misc.  Unlike alt, you typically have to show
existing discussion of a topic--not just show that it's a good idea--
to justify a mainstream group.  You've offered no evidence that there's 
enough discussion to support a boycotts group, let alone that boycott
announcements need a second group.  

There is certainly no shortage of existing places to discuss particular
boycotts; an AT&T boycott would be reasonable in alt.suit.att-bsdi or
comp.unix.bsd, an abortion-related boycott in talk.abortion.  Want
to boycott Cracker Barrel because of their anti-gay stance?  Try 
rec.travel, misc.consumers, and any of the "alternative lifestyle" groups.  
Etc. ad infitum.

As for the name, I would think "misc.activism.boycotts" is a much
better location for the group than creating another (virtually dead-end)
category directly under misc.
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7
From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 31 Aug 92 16:36:55 GMT

In <1992Aug31.135618.11612@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades) writes:

>    If you want to centralize the discussion of the show, I have no
>problem with that. What I do have a problem with is a single television
>show getting it's own mainstream newsgroup. There are just no guarantees
>that a tv show will last longer than a couple of years and we have no
>need for more dead weight in the mainstram hierarchies. Since there has
>been preliminary discussion in alt.config I say continue it and create
>alt.tv.blakes7.

The show has been off the air for a few (10?) years, and it continues to
generate discussion.  I think rec.arts.sf.tv.blakes7 has established
its long-term viability (by net standards).

I probably will not vote on it, as I don't read any of the rec.arts groups,
but I think it deserves a chance.

--
Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
My interaction with our news system is unstable; if you want to be sure I see a post, mail it.
From: thornley@nano.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.abstract
Keywords: perfect-information deterministic strategic no-dice
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:43:14 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.


The RFD uses the word "strategic" a lot in description of group actions.
Again, there are two incompatible meanings of "strategic games", and I
suggest that you do *not* use this term in the charter unless you want
confusion.

DHT
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: n1gak@netcom.com (Scott Statton)
Subject: Re: misc.forsale.computers reorg
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 01:49:20 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Keywords: rfd

In article <1992Aug25.222535.480@qedqcd.rye.ny.us> newsnews@qedqcd.rye.ny.us (News Acct. 1) writes:
>Hi all,
>
>	Here's a modified proposal - I think it captures most
>	of what has been said so far:
>
>	misc.forsale.computers.isa.systems
	.
	.
	.
>	So how does it look?
>Mike


I am whole-heartedly in agreement with this division;


	Scott


Newsgroups: news.groups,misc.legal
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.legal.family moderated
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:31:55 GMT

>On the other hand perhaps it does not go far enough.  Should misc.legal and 
>misc.legal.computing be reorganized into a misc.legal.______ family?

Some ideas I scribbled down sometime in the past:

- misc.legal.{usa,misc,international,news,civil,criminal}
- misc.legal.constitution (or misc.legal.usa.constitution?
  and misc.legal.usa.misc ?)

Perhaps also misc.legal.work (workplace/employment stuff),
misc.legal.culture (lawschool stuff, does USA have too many lawyers,
should we kill all the lawyers etc.)

//Jyrki
Newsgroups: news.groups