HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rrizzo@BBN.COM (Ron Rizzo)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Data freeway?
Summary: Al Gore loves the internet
Keywords: A world of flames
Date: 28 Jan 93 23:08:21 GMT
Reply-To: rrizzo@BBN.COM (Ron Rizzo)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: archive.bbn.com


Well, it looks like I'll be around at least for a few more weeks.  Last night
I chanced on the following development:


		DATA FREEWAY?


A recent (I think yesterday's) NY Times had a major (page 1?) cover story
on Al Gore's proposal for a Data Highway for Americans:  that is, having 
the federal gov't fund and implement a high-speed version of Usenet available
to all Americans, and especially to public institutions like libraries, 
schools and hospitals that may not be able to afford a privately-backed
effort.

It would involve among other things converting local telephone lines from
copperwire to fiber optics (long-distance lines have already been converted
to fiber).

Not surprisingly, some private sector interests want the gov't to stay out
of it, despite the precedent of ARPAnet, etc.  This group of opinion is led
by Robert Allen of AT&T.  However, many regional Bell holding companies
favor a public-funded effort.

So the nation follows Usenet down the primrose path, I mean, the yellow
brick road (dunh!), I mean, the freeway to the future.

Is it possible to imagine a national flamefest, a quarter of a billion hot
& bothered typists?  A subcontinent aflame?  Generating the greatest moment
of animus the world has ever seen?  An emergent net mind?  A new religion?

The NYTimes article said the Internet has about 10 million users.  It's
now believed the number of users doubles each year.  It consists of 9000
networks (WANs?)  But it's not anywhere near big enough or fast enough
for a public data highway.

Who would've thought that electron soda was the wave, so to speak, of the
future?  Think of all those coworkers who thought *we* were warped and
inscrutable for being married to our terminals.

I feel like an original signer!

GLB-tiein: maybe it's time to think about how to work out a GLB presence on
the freeway, considering the homophobia shown in the past by Compuserv and
maybe other pay-nets.

Regards,
Ron
From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Audrey
Date: 22 Jan 1993 02:00:27 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu


In article <mattm-210193161807@mcmelmon.apple.com> 
mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:
> In article <C17tM0.6t0@cs.vu.nl>, fjvwing@cs.vu.nl (FJ!!) wrote:
> > I'm not sure if we can call Audrey Hepburn a great actress, I think I
> > can say that she was certainly adequate, and almost always a pleasant
> > actress.

Audrey Hepburn was one of the great movie stars, from the
days when movie stars were still movie stars.  Her acting 
abilities are beside the point, although I think you sell 
her short by saying that she was "adequate".

> > `Roman Holiday' may be cotton-candy, but it feels like
> > cotton-candy made with love.
>
> There are very few "great" actresses, and the name was already
> taken by one. 

It must be because I've been hideously sick with the flu
for the past few days, but I don't get the allusion.

> Certainly Audrey Hepburn was as talented as
> most (much like, oh, Marlene Dietrich...)

Well, yes.  And, like Dietrich, Audrey Hepburn created her own
reality on screen.  I can think of few, if any, performances 
more charming than Hepburn's in "Roman Holiday" and "Breakfast 
at Tiffany's" and "Funny Face".  And what about her performance
in "Wait Until Dark"?  She's *wonderful*.  Or how about in 
"Two for the Road"?  *Fabulous*.  She's good even in dreck,
like "Green Mansions".  

Audrey Hepburn was one of the last true *movie stars*,
and we won't ever see her like again.

Arne

Newsgroups: soc.motss,alt.sex.motss
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Subject: Re: Wil Wheaton at MacWorld!!!!!
Organization: insert anything here
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 13:33:25 GMT

anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
>In article <1993Jan21.235502.745@reed.edu> nelson@reed.edu
>(Nelson Minar), who of course is one of our biggest
>sweeties, writes:

>>In article <mattm-210193121236@mcmelmon.apple.com>
>>mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:
[who of course isn't --- I'd really like to send his resume to one of the
"We'll cure your homosexuality" places so then wdon't have to be burdened
with 'well, he's a pus, but he's family'...]

>>>[of me:]
>>>I hadn't realized how truly disadvantaged you were, Jezeboo.

>>"And one day the chicken woman had chicks, and everyone
>>stepped on them because they were sooooo ugly."

>I appreciate the sentiment, and similar expressions last
>week, but it isn't really necessary (not on my behalf,
>anyway).  He seems to get off on it, and apart from maybe
>boredom, no one is hurt by it.  It's sort of like smog.

	Hey, I *like* smog!  Well, not to breathe it, but it is a great
neutral density filter.  (Cuts out a fraction of the LA lights for
observing...)

	0.01* :-)

BBC
From: chloupek@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Last night on TV
Date: 27 Jan 93 16:24:41 EST
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Physics

In article <1993Jan27.154958.29918@news.cs.brandeis.edu>, pratt@binah.cc.brandeis.edu writes:
> Did anyone see and have a reaction to last night's "First Person with
> Maria Shriver"? 

> I was especially struck by the theme of "Churchiness" through several of the segmen
> segments I saw. One the one hand, most of the battles are waged against the
> authority of either the Church or a church. On the other hand, gay people
> themselves are represented as seeking validation through the Church or a
> church. I'm deeply dismayed by this -- it seems that we are only recreating
> potential situations of oppression. In my opinion, and in this I am unanimous,
> deliver me from Dignity, Integrity, Concerned Lutherans, MCC...
>                 
I liked the show.  It was really designed for strayts who know very little
about gays and lesbians.  The issue about religion is one that concerns most
people and to show glb folks seeking spiritual fulfillment addresses that.  

If there is any complaint about the show, it was that it tries to fit gays and
lesbians into a heterosexual mode in all things.  But again, this show was
obviously designed to educate those who know very little about glb folks. 
Non-threatening in the extreme.

Frank


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frank R. Chloupek 
CHLOUPEK@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu 
Department of Physics -- *The* Ohio State University
(Not just any Ohio State University) 

"I wouldn't mind marching off to battle with Alexander the Great, but I 
wouldn't want him pinching me."
--State Sen. Eugene J. Watts (R-Galloway, and OSU associate professor)
From: markm@ogicse.ogi.edu (Mark Morrissey)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Tips for coming out to friends?
Date: 24 Jan 93 18:15:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.49008
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGC), Beaverton, OR

In article <1993Jan21.035753.5353@Princeton.EDU> dem@cs.princeton.edu (Doron Meyer) writes:
>Hello again everyone.
>
>I'm starting to contemplate coming out selectively to very
>close friends.  However, I want to make sure to do it right,
>as I can't undo things if I screw them up.

There are lots of ways to do this and, depending upon your personality,
some of the suggestions will be more or less appropriate for you.  I
have taken to wearing a small pink triangle (now that the No on 9
campaign is over).  Some people ask about the triangle and they get a
direct and honest reply ("It means I'm gay").  The interesting thing is
that I have made more friends by wearing this one small piece of
jewelry - especially at the grocery store.  Some of my friends just
kept stealing glances at it until I finally said something like "Oh, I
see that you like my triangle.  Care to know what it signifies?" One or
two have gotten treated to a "Boy!  Some days it is just so hard being
queer."  My division manager found out when I brought my boyfriend to a
party while wearing a "No on 9, Love See No Gender" t-shirt.

I suggest that you be inventive and don't worry too much.  If they are
your friends they won't go running and screaming into the night.  If
they are observant, they might even say "it's about time you figured
that out."  Most of my family responded with "we always suspected but
didn't know how to ask."  Most of my friends have responded with "do
you have a boyfriend?"

Now, since you are worried about doing it wrong, I suggest that you
don't walk into the room wearing commando gear, brandishing a machete
screaming "Die breeder!  die!  This fag ain't gonna take it anymore!"
Of course, it might work for you.

--mark
--
Mark Morrissey           One Hatred to rule them all.  One Hatred to find them.
markm@cse.ogi.edu        One Hatred to bring them all and in the darkness bind
                         them.  In the land of Bigotry where the Shadows lie.

Newsgroups: soc.misc
From: plarimer@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (         )
Subject: Re: What is 'soc' short for?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:15:30 GMT

In <1993Jan22.133056.11987@infodev.cam.ac.uk> gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry) writes:
 
>[Followups to soc.misc.]

>I've been reading and sporadically posting to a variety of soc.*
>groups for some time now.  Yet it's only just struck me that I don't
>actually know what the 'soc' bit signifies.  There seem to be two
>quite different interpretations which sometimes fit rather uneasily
>with each other: 'social', i.e. groups in which people who are
>bisexual/coupled/male/gay/single/female/etc. have an opportunity to
>socialize electronically, and 'sociology', i.e. groups whose purpose
>is to discuss the sociology (in a popular sense) of being
>bisexual/coupled/male/gay/single/female/etc.  Each group has a
>different balance between the two aspects, presumably influenced by
>history, who happens to be posting at the time and other similar
>factors, but it still seems to me that the soc.* hierarchy has never
>really worked out which purpose it is serving.

>Any comments on this?  And can anyone who's been on the net for
>sufficiently long give an account of how and why the soc.* hierarchy
>was set up?
   

Seams to me that the soc.* groups are for anything socialy relevant
to the addressed topic, whether that be simple discussion or providing
information.


-- 
*******************************************************************************
Yes, I know there's spelling errors, there always is.
<Plarimer@ucs.indiana.edu>
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.misc,soc.bi,soc.couples,soc.men,soc.motss,soc.singles,soc.women
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Subject: What is 'soc' short for?
Followup-To: soc.misc
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:30:56 GMT

[Followups to soc.misc.]

I've been reading and sporadically posting to a variety of soc.*
groups for some time now.  Yet it's only just struck me that I don't
actually know what the 'soc' bit signifies.  There seem to be two
quite different interpretations which sometimes fit rather uneasily
with each other: 'social', i.e. groups in which people who are
bisexual/coupled/male/gay/single/female/etc. have an opportunity to
socialize electronically, and 'sociology', i.e. groups whose purpose
is to discuss the sociology (in a popular sense) of being
bisexual/coupled/male/gay/single/female/etc.  Each group has a
different balance between the two aspects, presumably influenced by
history, who happens to be posting at the time and other similar
factors, but it still seems to me that the soc.* hierarchy has never
really worked out which purpose it is serving.

Any comments on this?  And can anyone who's been on the net for
sufficiently long give an account of how and why the soc.* hierarchy
was set up?
--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk 
Newsgroups: soc.misc
From: era@csn.org (Ed Arnold)
Subject: REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE
Originator: era@teal.csn.org
Keywords: Extremists, Christian Right, Amendment 2
Reply-To: era@csn.org (Ed Arnold)
Organization: Citizens Project; Colorado Springs, CO
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 01:47:33 GMT

We of the Citizens Project (Colorado Springs, CO) are looking for people
who could assist us in re-distributing the Citizens Project Newsletter
to non-Internet computer services.  If you have an account on any such
services (CompuServe, FidoNet, Genie, Prodigy, America Online, and others)
and are willing to help us, please let us know via return email to
era@ncar.ucar.edu.

The Citizens Project is a Colorado Springs, CO - based group of volunteers
who seek to prevent extremists from eliminating our fundamental freedoms,
in the face of growing political and religious intolerance in Colorado.
--
Ed Arnold * Boulder, CO * 303-497-1253(voice,weekday) * 303-494-6949(voice)
internet: era@csn.org * compuserve: internet:era@csn.org * bitnet: era@ncario
-- 
Ed Arnold * Boulder, CO * 303-497-1253(voice,weekday) * 303-494-6949(voice)
internet: era@csn.org * compuserve: internet:era@csn.org * bitnet: era@ncario
From: dlytle@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU (Don Lytle)
Newsgroups: soc.misc
Subject: The Association for the Study of Play conference
Date: 21 Jan 93 21:01:22 GMT
Reply-To: dlytle@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: oavax.csuchico.edu


                 *****   ANNOUNCEMENT AND CALL FOR PAPERS   *****

                             TASP 1993 - St. Paul, MN
                     The Association for the Study of Play
      April 22 - 24, 1993 * The St. Paul Hotel * St. Paul, Minnesota

   The Association For The Study of Play (TASP) will hold its 1993 annual meetings in St. Paul, Minnesota.  The conference will begin Thursday and continue   until Saturday, April 24. There will be featured speakers, playshops, and forums for the discussion and presentation of   research papers on all aspects of play research, theory, performance and behavior.
    For the past twenty years TASP conferences have provided  a  mechanism by  which  researchers in diverse fields have the opportunity to share ideas  and  interact  in  a friendly and collegial atmosphere.
   Papers and proposals for panel sessions or tutorials related to the broad  study of play are invited.  Sessions include, but are not limited to:
 - Humor, laughter
 - Computer and cyperspace play
 - Folklore
 - Children's play behavior
 - Cross-cultural play
 - Body work and play art
 - Performance 
 - Anthropology of festive play
 - Sport
 - Literary playfulness

Deadline for submission of abstracts is February 5, 1993.

Send abstracts (100 word maximum), audio-visual needs, and registration fees  ($60 professional and $20 student made payable to TASP) to:

Dr. Don Lytle
Department of Physical Education
California State University, Chico  95929-0330. 
Bitnet/E-Mail: DLYTLE@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU; FAX: 916 898-4932; 
Phone: {916} 898-6617 or 898-6373 {message}
Newsgroups: soc.misc
From: cmclark@dri.com (Chip Clark)
Subject: Help! - I need to talk to Ft Bragg!!!!!
Reply-To: cmclark@drivax.mry.novell.com
Organization: Desktop Systems Group/Novell, Monterey CA/USA
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 19:59:46 GMT

I am looking for someone with an attachment (or connection)
in or near Ft Bragg (North Carolina) USA.  


This is extremely important!!!!

Please contact me at 

cmclark@novell.com

or call (408) 645-2151

Chip - 
cmclark@novell.com

"And happy always was it for that son
Whose father for his hoarding went to hell?" - King Henry VI -Shakespeare
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
From: rberlin@birdland.Eng.Sun.COM (Rich Berlin)
Subject: Re: Someone Convince Me
Organization: SunPics -- A Sun Microsystems Business
	<1993Jan23.155518.27659@wam.umd.edu> <2B647488.22630@ics.uci.edu>
	<199301252339.AA02184@news.service.uci.edu>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:26:21 GMT

In article <199301252339.AA02184@news.service.uci.edu> cortese@skid.ps.UCI.EDU (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
   The moral of all this is that science is a TOOL, and is subject to the
   biases and prejudices of those who apply it, just as any other
   discipline is.  Science is not the tablets from the mountain, not
   received truth, not any kind of ipartial judge of the universe.  It is a
   tool, and only a tool and must be properly applied before it can get at
   anything.  Ergo, it depends on FEELINGS for its motivations and its
   judgements.  As a hard scientist, I know this.

Yes, yes, yes.  I was so glad to see Janis' post about this because it
seems that so many people have this misconception about "science!"  My
experiences in research science have led me to see things much the way
Janis describes them: not only is the "science" a tool, it is only ONE
tool, and other tools, e.g. intuition, are required to do the whole
job.  The discipline of the scientific method helps map the landscape,
but it is up to the researcher to make sense out of it.

For an interesting discussion of (among *many* other things!) the
limitations of the scientific method, and the limitations of
"analysis" in general, I recommend an age-old classic: "Zen and the
Art of Motorcycle Maintenance," by Robert Pirsig.

-- Rich

Richard.Berlin@Eng.Sun.COM 	    SunPics engineering		 (415) 336-5126


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: turpin@cs.utexas.EDU (Russell Turpin)
Subject: On casual discussion of sex  (was: Someone Convince Me)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:05:20 GMT

-*----
In article <bob1.727998758@cos> bob1@cos.COM (Bob Blackshaw) writes:
> Sex, like breathing, is part of living. When was the last
> time you saw a magazine, talk show, etc. devoted to 'How to
> breathe'.

This is a recurring topic on shows and in magazines
that have various features on health.  "How to breathe
right" is a theme that is discussed in relation to
general health, and with regard to sports from yoga
to swimming.

> ... But if it comes to the point where what goes on [sexually]
> is shown on prime time, then I still believe we are screwed
> up on the subject.

Maybe so.  But if so, why?  I think the analogy to
breathing fails miserably.  Breathing, exercise, diet,
emotional disturbance, etc. etc. are each a "part of
living" that serves as grist for the talkshows.  How
does it show that "we are screwed up on the subject"
of sex because it, like these other parts of living,
also gets ground in the same mill?

Russell

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.EDU (Daniel Zabetakis)
Subject: Re: Archetypical anti-anti-porn comment
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Biological Sciences.
Date: 26 Jan 93 00:05:14 GMT

In article <2B6471CD.20987@ics.uci.edu> tittle@alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle Moore) writes:
>
>Yes, you could argue that it's one of the sicknesses of this culture
>that women are not supposed to like sex and therefore condemn it.  But
>is it because they've been raised to be prudish WRT sex or because
>they recognize, however unconsciously, that it puts a target on them,
>as Janis so cogently pointed out?
>

   I think it is more likely the prudish upbringing. I think we can
probably find evidence for this, although I don't have sources.
   What I'm going to say comes from discussion with women both hear
and on the net, as well as articles I've seen posted by women here and
in other groups. And also some published articles that I've read.
There was an article posted here last year called 'Feminism and
sado-masochism' that was particularly good.

   It seems to me that women who become highly sexually active, or
sexually deviant, or have a strong interest in pornography, they
usually express this transition in terms of overcoming puritanism.  "I
went to church every week until I moved out on my own, and then I
became a leather fetishist" would not be a very unusual statment.
    I have not heard any woman express her transition in terms of
loosing a threatened sensation.

   I know that the group I am talking about are not the 'average'
woman, but I think my observations are generally applicable, at least
to some degree.

DanZ

--
This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions,
narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do
not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.


--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.