HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell)
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 04:10:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct08.222634.7486@sco.COM> erics@sco.COM (eric smith) writes:
>Near-zero odds are great until it happens to you. 

This is the well-known "100% if it happens to you" fallacy.  
Wonderful rhetoric.  Miserable way to determine public policy.
The odds of being killed by a falling potted rhododendron are
near-zero -- but it's 100% if it happens to you.

>Or your sister, brother,
>child, parent, or friend. That's when you realize that whatever the odds
>were, it doesn't matter because it's a human tragedy. And in a larger,
>and more caring, view than yours, Ted, it's a human tragedy if it's
>happening to anyone's sister, brother, child, parent, or friend.

I defy you to find a post that says I don't care about AIDS.  It's not
true that accurately quantifying the extent of a problem is being uncaring
about it.  One might argue quite convincingly that the exact opposite is
true.
-- 
ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu 
also at quibeaux@uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
ajax crypto-analyzer -- warning! remove all chicken bones first
Xref: sparky alt.politics.correct:5702 alt.sex:33123 sci.skeptic:18016
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.sex,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Date: 16 Oct 92 02:08:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1bkrsbINNikj@agate.berkeley.edu> shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff) writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.041014.27111@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>The odds of being killed by a falling potted rhododendron are
>>near-zero -- but it's 100% if it happens to you.
>
>This is almost entirely irrelevant, but since I have the statistics...
>In 1980, falling objects killed 1037 people in the US, making falling
>objects about as deadly as electric current (1095 deaths), but safer than
>boats (1214 drownings) and stairs (1349 deaths) and aircraft (1494 deaths).
>(Again, I would like to stress that I am not making any point here other
>than that I think these statistics are interesting.  Just think, every day
>three Americans are killed by falling objects -- that's quite a body count.)

How about a relevant issue, deaths caused by autos. If we required every
driver to be a highly trained professional, we could save many of the
50,000+ deaths caused by cars, almost cartainly. So by the same reasoning,
it has to be worth it.

Of course, all those unemployed people will be a problem, mass transit 
(at least in the bay area) is not up to delivering everyone to work.
 
>Ken Shirriff				shirriff@sprite.Berkeley.EDU

Rich

payner@netcom.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.sex
From: erics@sco.COM (eric smith)
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1992 22:26:34 GMT


thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell) writes:

>AIDS can lie dormant for years on end, but HIV is detectable within six
>months.

It's only detectable if one is tested, and most people aren't.

>One has less chance of contract AIDS in a single heterosexual encounter than
>dying in a car accident in the ten-mile drive to that encounter.

The problem with analogies like this one (e.g. the "less chance than
being struck by lightning" analogy) is that every time every time someone
dies in a car accident it doesn't increase everyone else's chances of
dying in a car accident, and every time someone is struck by lightning
it doesn't increase everyone else's chances of being struck by lightning.
But every time someone is infected by HIV it does increase *everyone*
else's chances of being infected by HIV (and I don't care what your
marital status, sexual orientation, or level of fidelity is, whether or
not you use drugs, what your age, religion, race, gender, or anything
else is, this statement is still true).

>What's wrong with near zero odds?  Look up some time the odds of being
>struck by lightening or dying in a car accident or by slipping on the
>soap in the bathroom or in an elevator accident at UMass-Amherst.  All
>are near zero also, and none significantly affect people's behavior.

Near-zero odds are great until it happens to you. Or your sister, brother,
child, parent, or friend. That's when you realize that whatever the odds
were, it doesn't matter because it's a human tragedy. And in a larger,
and more caring, view than yours, Ted, it's a human tragedy if it's
happening to anyone's sister, brother, child, parent, or friend.

-----
Eric Smith
erics@sco.com
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610

Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: agriguhn@lobo.rmhs.colorado.edu (Andrew P Griguhn)
Subject: family values
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 15:11:01 GMT
Organization: Rocky Mountain High School

        There are so many pertinant issues in this election, yet all of the 
candidates, with the exception of Mr. Perot, continue to debate on who has 
better family values.  It seems that all of the world's problems stem from the 
lack of "traditional" families.  Granted this might be the case, but it is 
ridiculus to think that America can impliment regulations to make sure 
everyone has family values.  Yes, they re important.  Yes, they should be the 
foundation of today's society, but they are not readily existant anymore.  The 
world, and country, have problems.  Let's focus on the issues and make an 
educated decision about who will do the best family values.  After all no one 
on earth can tell anyone else that they have better family values than someone 
else.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.sex,sci.skeptic
From: schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher)
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:03:12 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Oct16.020851.10483@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:

>How about a relevant issue, deaths caused by autos. If we required every
>driver to be a highly trained professional, we could save many of the
>50,000+ deaths caused by cars, almost cartainly. So by the same reasoning,
>it has to be worth it.

Never mind highly-trained professionals. A simple, common-sense
measure like getting the drunks off the road would save a third of 
those lives. Similarly, simple, common-sense steps like dispensing
condoms in all schools and clean needle exchanges would
reduce the HIV infection rate significantly, as the Dutch experience
demonstrates.

Xref: sparky alt.politics.correct:5708 alt.sex:33187 sci.skeptic:18036
From: cherkaue@zomma.cs.wisc.edu (Kevin J. Cherkauer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.sex,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:27:15 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.

In article <1992Oct16.020851.10483@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>How about a relevant issue, deaths caused by autos. If we required every
>driver to be a highly trained professional, we could save many of the
>50,000+ deaths caused by cars, almost cartainly. So by the same reasoning,
>it has to be worth it.

Your analogy seems a bit stretched. Consider this variation: if everyone
driving a car wore a helmet (condom), then how many deaths caused by autos
could we prevent? My guess is that it would be quite a high portion of them.
But then, peer pressure would make most people feel foolish wearing a crash
helmet in their car. Does similar "machismo" prevent condom use?

Amidst all the flying fur, I'm not sure where this fits in with the original
posting...

-- 
Kevin Cherkauer
cherkaue@cs.wisc.edu

Disclaimer: The above opinions are solely the responsibility of my owners.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.sex
From: erics@sco.COM (eric smith)
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 19:52:43 GMT


aberman@cs.washington.edu (Andrew Berman) writes:

>In article <1992Oct08.222634.7486@sco.COM> erics@sco.COM (eric smith) writes:

>>Near-zero odds are great until it happens to you. Or your sister, brother,
>>child, parent, or friend. That's when you realize that whatever the odds
>>were, it doesn't matter because it's a human tragedy. And in a larger,
>>and more caring, view than yours, Ted, it's a human tragedy if it's
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>Uh, this is how a flame war gets started.

>I've been following this thread, and I've seen NOTHING from Ted's
>postings that suggest he is any less caring than anyone else on the
>net. I've seen NOTHING to suggest that Ted doesn't consider it to
>be a human tragedy if anyone dies of AIDS.

>And if you've read that into it, well, take a minute to consider
>that you might have made a mistake.

OK, I admit I might have made a mistake. But it sure seemed to me that
what Ted was saying can be paraphrased as "hey, all us heterosexuals
don't need to worry about AIDS because the odds that we'll get it are
near-zero, so we can do whatever we like", disregarding the fact that
even near-zero odds mean that somebody, somewhere is going to get it.
It was the disregard for those people who happen to get caught by the
odds that I saw as uncaring. If I've misread the intent of his articles,
then I apologize for my statement.

-----
Eric Smith
erics@sco.com
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610
From: gcburns@sdrc.COM (Thomas C. Burns)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: This "Persons" Thing
Date: 7 Oct 92 00:37:08 GMT
Organization: SDRC, Cincinnati OH  U.S.A.


	Hopefully some of you informed people can answer this for me.  

	I can understand the motivation for some the politically correct 
terminology like "Vertically Challenged", "Vegetarian Philosophers of Color" 
and the like.

	Could someone tell me why it is politically correct to use the word 
"persons" rather than the word "people" ?

	Maybe a word need only be confusing to be "correct".

	I will collect e-mail responses and post a summary.

			Thanks,

			Tom Burns
--
The views expressed are my own and do not represent my employers.

Thomas C. Burns                         gcburns@sdrc.com
Technical Development Engineer
Structural Dynamics Research Corp.      uunet!sdrc!gcburns
2000 Eastman Drive
Milford, Ohio  U.S.A.  45150-2789       (513)-576-2850
From: ehorne@zeus.calpoly.edu (Eric T Horne)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: Please Help
Date: 13 Oct 92 22:15:18 GMT
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

In article <19410001@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Kingsley Morse) writes:
>              Please answer these 9 questions and return.
>
>1.) Do you think equal rights for men and women is generally a good idea?
>Yes                  [ ]
>
>2.) Are you pro choice?
>Yes                  [ ]
>
>3.) Are you in favor of adoption?
>Sometimes            [ ]
>
>4.) Do you think men should be allowed to legally terminate their parental
>rights and responsibilities before fetal viability?
>No                   [ ]
>
>5.) What sex are you?
>Male               [ ]
>
>6.) How old are you?
>19 to 65           [ ]
>
>7.) What religion are you?
>Catholic           [ ]  (but not active)
>
>8.) What political party are you affiliated with?
>Republican         [ ]
>
>9.) How many years of education have you completed?
>High School        [ ]

Now, since I have answered the questions, would you tell me what this is
for?

Thanks

-Eric
From: bud@mtek.com (Bud Hovell)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:33:34 GMT
Reply-To: bud@mtek.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: MTEK International, Inc.

erics@sco.COM (eric smith) writes:

>Exactly right. And if we can save people from being killed by
>potted rhododendrons through education and prevention programs,
>and encouraging them to use safe floral design techniques,
>even if the odds are near-zero, then I think those people are
>worth saving. Do you?

Damn right! And I promise to fully support the financing of this
idea just as soon as you send along the signature card on your
personal checking account. Let's do it!
-- 
________________________________________________________________
bud@mtek.com ... uunet!m2xenix!mtek!bud ... bud@rigel.cs.pdx.edu
MTEK International, Inc.             Throughput Technology Corp.
Throughput!
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Thursday, 1 Oct 1992 16:20:45 EDT
From: <F36SI@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Model UN newsgroup

      Second call - anyone interested in starting a Model UN
          newsgroup email me at f36si@cunyvm.  Peace.
                          Matt
Xref: sparky alt.politics.correct:5667 alt.sex:32804
From: aberman@cs.washington.edu (Andrew Berman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.sex
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Date: 13 Oct 92 04:15:22 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Oct08.222634.7486@sco.COM> erics@sco.COM (eric smith) writes:
>
>Near-zero odds are great until it happens to you. Or your sister, brother,
>child, parent, or friend. That's when you realize that whatever the odds
>were, it doesn't matter because it's a human tragedy. And in a larger,
>and more caring, view than yours, Ted, it's a human tragedy if it's
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Uh, this is how a flame war gets started.

I've been following this thread, and I've seen NOTHING from Ted's
postings that suggest he is any less caring than anyone else on the
net. I've seen NOTHING to suggest that Ted doesn't consider it to
be a human tragedy if anyone dies of AIDS.

And if you've read that into it, well, take a minute to consider
that you might have made a mistake.

Please let's not all confuse differeing interpretations of statistics
with "caring" or "not caring."


>happening to anyone's sister, brother, child, parent, or friend.
>
>-----
>Eric Smith
>erics@sco.com
>erics@infoserv.com
>CI$: 70262,3610
>


-- 
Andrew P. Berman           |  "It's no exaggeration to say the undecideds
Dept. of Computer Science  |  could go one way or the other."
University of Washington   |    -George Bush 10/21/88
aberman@cs.washington.edu  |
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Tuesday, 29 Sep 1992 18:44:38 EDT
From: <F36SI@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Model United Nations T-shirts

Running or participating in a Model UN?  Show your pride and/or raise money for
your conference by purchasing Model UN t-shirts!  The company of Delta Foxtrot
nterprises has joined forces with the United Nations Association of the USA - M
del UN Dept in creating a new line of Model Un accessories starting off with a
ine of Model UN t-shirts.  The line is called "Model UN - PEACE ROCKS - World T
ur 92 - 93". The front has the tour logo for 92-93 and the back has a list of a
l of the cities in the world which host Model UNs.  They are 100% preshrunk cot
on.  They are $8 a piece in orders of a dozen or more.  They can be sold at the
conference for $10, thereby earning money for the conference organizers
as well as advertising the Model UN program everytime it is worn.  We have also
agreed to to donate to the Model UN dept of UNA-USA a percentage of the profits
from the sale of these accessories thereby giving Model UN organizers a futher
eturn on their investment through a stronger UNA-USA national headquarters.  Fo
 more information, email me at :
                                f36si@cunyvm.
          Best wishes on your conference!!!!
                                            Matthew J. Rosenwasser
                                            President
                                            Delta Foxtrot Enterprises
From: kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Kingsley Morse)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:43:13 GMT
Subject: Please Help
Organization: HP Western Response Center
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct

              Please answer these 9 questions and return.

1.) Do you think equal rights for men and women is generally a good idea?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

2.) Are you pro choice?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

3.) Are you in favor of adoption?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

4.) Do you think men should be allowed to legally terminate their parental
rights and responsibilities before fetal viability?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

5.) What sex are you?
Male               [ ]
Female             [ ]

6.) How old are you?
Under 18           [ ]
19 to 65           [ ]
Over 65            [ ]

7.) What religion are you?
Protestant         [ ]
Catholic           [ ]
Jewish             [ ]
Other              [ ]

8.) What political party are you affiliated with?
Democratic         [ ]
Republican         [ ]
Other              [ ]

9.) How many years of education have you completed?
Grade School       [ ]
High School        [ ]
College            [ ]
More               [ ]
Xref: sparky alt.politics.correct:5701 alt.sex:33104 sci.skeptic:18010
From: shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.sex,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Date: 15 Oct 1992 22:38:03 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: hijack.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Oct13.041014.27111@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>The odds of being killed by a falling potted rhododendron are
>near-zero -- but it's 100% if it happens to you.

This is almost entirely irrelevant, but since I have the statistics...
In 1980, falling objects killed 1037 people in the US, making falling
objects about as deadly as electric current (1095 deaths), but safer than
boats (1214 drownings) and stairs (1349 deaths) and aircraft (1494 deaths).
(Again, I would like to stress that I am not making any point here other
than that I think these statistics are interesting.  Just think, every day
three Americans are killed by falling objects -- that's quite a body count.)

Ken Shirriff				shirriff@sprite.Berkeley.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.sex,sci.skeptic
From: erics@sco.COM (eric smith)
Subject: Re: AIDS and high-risk behavior
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:00:32 GMT


thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell) writes:

>In article <1992Oct08.222634.7486@sco.COM> erics@sco.COM (eric smith) writes:

>>Near-zero odds are great until it happens to you. 

>This is the well-known "100% if it happens to you" fallacy.  
>Wonderful rhetoric.  Miserable way to determine public policy.
>The odds of being killed by a falling potted rhododendron are
>near-zero -- but it's 100% if it happens to you.

Exactly right. And if we can save people from being killed by
potted rhododendrons through education and prevention programs,
and encouraging them to use safe floral design techniques,
even if the odds are near-zero, then I think those people are
worth saving. Do you?

-----
Eric Smith
erics@sco.com
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Tuesday, 29 Sep 1992 20:16:25 EDT
From: <F36SI@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: MODEL UN T-SHIRTS

Model UN T-shirts -
"Model UN "PEACE ROCKS" World Tour 92-93"  availible
$8 apiece in a dozen or more.  Part of profits to go
to Model UN program of UNA-USA.  Email f36si@cunyvm
for more info.
matt
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: leescogg@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Lee)
Subject: Re: Percent of people with medical insurance
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 05:03:20 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.151122.16836@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>About a week or so ago I posted a claim that 83% of american citizens 
>have health care.  This was disputed by nearly everyone to the left 
>of rush limbaugh.  Well, for any of you who watched the debates last 
>night, I'm sure you heard this:
>
>	Your candidate, Bill Clinton, said that 35 million people 
>did not have health care.  Run the numbers please.
>
>	~300million citizens -35 million without yields
>
>		11.7% without health care and 
>		88.3% with health care


Your figures are a little faulty.  As I remember, at the population of the
US is something over 200M.  Also, the 35 million that Clinton was talking 
about is employable adults.  Figuring that there is about 1/2 of the population
that is employable, you end up with nowhere near 85% coverage with health
insurance.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: FA.JGS@forsythe.stanford.edu (Joe Shackelford)
Subject: JUST A REMINDER
Item: su.gay 3351,  Wed, 14 O,  61 lines.    (0 items left)
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 22:08:33 GMT

   !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  JUST A REMINDER  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
             THIS IS A FUN SHOW AND PROCEEDS
            ARE GOING FOR A VERY WORTHY CAUSE

  $$$$$$$$$$$$$   WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$



                  SOUTH BAY DRIVE SHAFTS

                        CAR CLUB

              GROOVIN' ON A SUNDAY AFTERNOON


October 14, 1992

Greetings from the South Bay Drive Shafts, a region of Lambda Car
Club International,  San Jose's only Gay and Lesbian special
interest antique car club.

After only one year, our membership has grown to seventy strong.  We
have participated in both  San Jose's pride parades, providing
classic vehicles for various VIP's, promoted and hosted tours to
various Bay Area points of interest, and have raised and
contributed several thousand dollars to local aids charities and
community service organizations.

The South Bay Drive Shafts recently participated in the 1992
International West Coast Auto Meet held in San Luis Obispo.  Well
over 500 members of similar auto organizations from all over the
country participated with hundreds of their classic autos.  As our
commitment to the weekends festivities, we presented the Friday
night show which was a musical tour of the 1960's.  This show
featured members of our club performing, both live and pantomine,
their favorite song and dance numbers associated with this era.  The
show was such a resounding success and word of it spread so quickly
that we have been asked to present this show as a benefit for our
local community.

The Procedes are to benefit Visting Nurses, Aris Food Basket and
Necessities and More.

Where: Gaslight Theater
       400 East Campbell Avenue
       In Beautiful Downtown Campbell
       The Valleys Fastest Growing Ghost Town

Where to call:  408-977-4288 OR 408-292-5682

When: October 18, 1992
      Mattinee Performance at 2pm
      Evening Preformance at 8pm

Cost: $10.00