HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gumphrey@IASTATE.EDU (Jammer of Axigally)
Subject: Re: There is no such thing!
Keywords: evil 
Reply-To: gumphrey@IASTATE.EDU (Jammer of Axigally)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 15:33:17 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.062740.25811@panix.com>, rpowers@panix.com (Richard
Powers) writes:
> I believe there is no reason for this newsgroup.  As I contend that there
> is no such thing is evil.  I doubt anyone can define "evil".  Because
> there is no such thing!
> 
> -- 
> rpowers@panix.com                                   Short & Sweet!
> 
  Ah!  But there are many definitions of evil...  First, the most fundamental
  (and quite useless, IMHO) definition is: "The opposite of good."  Of course,
  then what is good; and what is the criterea for determining what its opposite
  is?

  There are two main "types" of evil that have been defined: Natural evil, and
  Moral evil.  Natural evil is basically an uncontrolled, unavoidable occurance
  that caused a tragedy.  Example: Earthquake kills thousands, or lover drives
  into a telephone poll at 85 mph, etc.  Moral evil is when a person comits an
  act that most of society considers wrong; i.e. Murder, rape, theft, etc...

  I personally like to make evil a little more specific.  First, throw out
  natural evil.  Sure, it raises "why do bad things happen to good people"
  question, but just isn't evil in my mind.  Second, I think evil involves the
  deliberate causing of pain to another creature with the sole purpose being
  to cause the pain.  (in other words, a doctor giving you a shot that hurts is
  NOT evil... unless it was unnecessary, and he just wanted to see you in
pain!)
  However, I must clarify.  The evil is not the pain caused (that falls under
  natural evil, in my book), but the intent of causing deliberate, malicious,
  pain AND carrying through with the action.  Note: pain can be mental as well
  as physical -- as long as the intent is to cause misery.

  Oh, and on a side note; The type of argument that Mr. Powers raised: "If it
  can't be defined, then it doesn't exist" is a crock of bullshit, anyway.
  Words have been created to define or embody some area human experience.
  The fact that evil exists as a word, shows that it stands for a concept.
  Whether or not evil could be defined with other words is irrelevant.
  Somebody, somewhere, sometime, had a feeling/experience and called it evil.
  (Yes, I know it's more complicated than that... I don't want to get into a
  linguistics discussion about the origin of the word evil!)  The point is,
that
  evil stands for something in most people's mind. EVEN in Mr. Power's mind, 
  for he has expressed that the concept of evil that he holds, does not exist
  in the human experience...  Ok, that we can discuss.  But the concept of evil
  is definately alive and well.  Good enough for validating the existance of
  alt.evil in my book!

				-- Jammer --
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Wednesday, 29 Jul 1992 09:13:41 CDT
From: <U30644@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.evil
Subject: Re: Danielle (story)
 <92205.090222U30644@uicvm.uic.edu> <1992Jul28.213343.4190@u.washington.edu>

In article <1992Jul28.213343.4190@u.washington.edu>,
hearsey@milton.u.washington.edu (Simon Hearsey) says:
>
>   Dick's story was more interesting than any of your lame flames by far.
>Why doesn't anyone else try doing something creative? Did you leave your
>brains at home in a jar?                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

THAT'S TELLIN' EM, SI!!!
>
>                                 Si
Newsgroups: alt.evil
From: jimbo.bbs@cybernet.cse.fau.edu
Subject: strokin
Organization: Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:32:20 GMT

hey rauser, i'm "strokin off" to the thought of shoving your fat
head into a whisper chipper

bienchen
Newsgroups: alt.evil
From: 10726446@eng2.eng.monash.edu.au (LAU WAI KUEN)
Subject: Re: Danielle (story)
Organization: Faculty of Engineering, Monash University 
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 04:11:22 GMT

In article <rauser.711671729@sfu.ca> rauser@fraser.sfu.ca (Richard John Rauser) writes:
>From: rauser@fraser.sfu.ca (Richard John Rauser)
>Subject: Re: Danielle (story)
>Date: 20 Jul 92 22:35:29 GMT

><U30644@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:

>>get a life.  


>   It takes incredible intelligence to come up with a comment like this.
>Congratulations! 

>--
>Richard J. Rauser        "Remember, no matter where you go,
>rauser@sfu.ca                 there you are."  
>WNI                                  -Buckaroo Banzai
> 
    I dunno.  Something like that, handed in as an answer to an essay could 
get good marks.

Halcyon
Newsgroups: alt.evil
From: jimbo.bbs@cybernet.cse.fau.edu
Subject: what is evil
Organization: Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 15:37:33 GMT

>So what is evil?

 A coca-cola sponsored television show in which richard nixon
 presents a humanitarian award to a teary imelda marcos.

Newsgroups: alt.co-ops,uiuc.general
From: swb56279@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve)
Subject: Re: Co-op house forming in Urbana for fall, veg-friendly
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: il
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:56:32 GMT
Keywords: housing, vegetarian, roommate wanted, $200 or less, Urbana


Speaking as a person who resides in a co-op here on the U of I campus,
there certainly is no law regarding having more than four people in a 
dwelling unless it is a single family dwelling.  I live with 27 other
men and somehow I really can't imagine having all 28 of us in a single
family dwelling.  Cooperatives do have certain guidelines that must 
be met throughout the year.  The placce to really go for answers is 
the university's certified housing division.  They should be able to
answer most(if not all) of your questions.  Best wishes.

Steve


*******************************************************************************
* Steve Bachar, Jr.           "Friends don't let friends use Macintoshes."    *
* 402 E Daniel                   Seahawk@uiuc.edu (ASCII mail)                * 
* Champaign, IL 61820            swb56279@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu                    * 
* (217) 344-0540	         swb56279@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu (NeXT Mail)     *
* Spring 1993 will be spent co-oping in Louisville, KY as a GE engineer.      *
*******************************************************************************
From: sra20@anagram.ccc.amdahl.com (Steven Alexander)
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Subject: Re: Co-ops in Texas
Date: 27 Jul 92 19:53:59 GMT
Reply-To: stevena@cs.berkeley.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <76630@ut-emx.uucp> smcdow@utexas.edu (Stuart McDow) writes:
>In addition, there's the Pedernales Electric Co-op, Austin KOOP radio (which, I
>believe, is the nation's only cooperatively run radio station), and various
> ...
> smcdow@utexas.edu    | 1. Theatre is Life.         |

I believe KKUP-FM in Cupertino, CA, is cooperatively run by its staff.

  Steven Alexander
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
From: kingdon@east-wind.org (Jim Kingdon)
Subject: Re: The House and the Lifecycle
Organization: East Wind Community, Tecumseh, Missouri, USA
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 17:50:28 GMT

    As a person grows and matures, her housing needs will change [from
    dorm to apartment to house to larger house]. . . .  Obviously this
    isn't the only path, but it does represent the general pattern people
    hope for.

Well, it represents the mainstream pattern; what most of our housing
facilities and institutions are built for.  But speaking as someone
who lives in an organization of people who have chosen dorm-style
housing (well, we have a few individual cabins, but they are without
kitchens or bathrooms, so are hardly self-contained), many (well, at
least some) people aren't satisifed with those choices.  We have
people of all ages (don't have any numbers handy; there are probably
more in their 20s, but are certainly more than a handful who are in
their 30s or older).

    Therefore, the cooperative housing movement should consider such
    options as co-housing . . ., community land trusts . . ., and other
    forms.

Well, if by "cooperative housing movement" you mean organizations like
the Institute for Community Economics in Springfield, MA, or the
Cooperative Housing Task Force in Boston, they are almost exclusively
dealing with less communal forms like these (in fact, I don't know if
they have gotten involved with anything as communal as co-housing).

    People might be given an option to
    buy into their residence.  This would be a way for the coop to
    raise capital and for the resident to reduce their rent payments.

Well, if a share gives people the right to reside in a residence and
can be transfered at will, the price of the share will gravitate to
the market price of such a unit (i.e. it operates much like a
condominium).  This is called a market-rate housing co-op.  Many
co-ops (especially those started by people who are trying to do
something about affordable housing, or who don't like the way housing
markets work) therefore put a cap on the rate with which a share can
rise in value (e.g. 5%/year plus the value of improvements that the
owner puts into the unit).  Limitations on share values is a Rochdale
principle.  The main problem with this is that by amending the bylaws
and removing the cap, residents can take a share which started out at
$1000 or $5000 and overnight make it worth $25,000, $50,000, or
$100,000.  These battles, between the selfish residents and the
idealists, tend to be nasty.  The Community Land Trust model has a
safeguard against this--only one third of the board of directors is
elected by the residents (and I assume a similar thing is true for
bylaws amendments).  Whether this diminishes the residents' feeling
that they have a say over how the organization is run, I don't know, I
don't have much experience with these organizations.

So all in all, I'm pretty happy with just leaving the whole can of
worms unopened.  If the capital needs which shares address can
be met by a member loan program, I would say that is preferable.
Newsgroups:  alt.co-ops
From: Michael.Kwun@um.cc.umich.edu
Subject: NASCOland mailgroup
Summary: gimme gimme gimme them e-mail addresses
Reply-To: kwun@umich.edu
Organization: University Of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 08:50:23 GMT

Hi.  I'm compiling e-mail address of members and alum of NASCO-affiliated
student housing co-ops.  Oh, and friends of NASCO, too.  I'm adding these
address to a mailgroup:
   NASCOland@um.cc.umich.edu
There are currently about 65 people on the list, mostly ICC-AA members/alums.
   If you are interested in being on the list or know of address I should
include, please e-mail me at kwun@umich.edu
   The list includes both NASCO offices:
   NASCO@um.cc.umich.edu  (Ann Arbor)
   2053nsco@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu  (Santa Barbara)
but please note that this project is my own; it is independent of NASCO, so
don't bug them about getting on or off the list, or at least do so in only the
kindest of tones.  Better yet, just get in touch with me.  If you later
decide you want to resign from the group, let me know.
 
 
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Internet:  Michael.Kwun@umich.edu  |  I speak for no one but myself.  |
|             kwun@css.itd.umich.edu  |  Support a local cooperative.    |
|  Bitnet:    userW0ZA@UMICHUM        |  Think Globally, Act Locally.    |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: jila@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (66120000)
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Subject: Re: Land use law and group homes
Date: 27 Jul 1992 06:29:20 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucscb.ucsc.edu


In article <1337700014@igc.org> Robert Abrams <rabrams@igc.org> writes:

>What's to prevent the coop from paying everyone a $1 per year and
>calling them employees?


	A funny thing, when University Cooperative Housing Association
at UCLA bought their first house in 1941 there was a restrictive covenant 
on the building's deed which restricted non-caucasians from residing there
unless they were servants.  The Co-op's attorny, August Rosenberg successfully
argued that since every co-op resident had to do work assignments, they were 
all essentially servants.  ;)

		--- I always liked that one.



					Jila Handjani
					Bixby Street Co-op
From: jila@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (66120000)
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Subject: Land use law and group homes
Date: 23 Jul 92 09:55:27 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucscb.ucsc.edu



Most cities set out zones which are to be developed for variuos uses, ie.
multi-residential housing, single family housing, industrial, commercial.
Some cities also construct a very narrow definition for what is considered 
"family" for the purpose of single family residences.   For example, some
ordinances define family as nor more than __ number of residents related 
either by blood or marriage sharing a single dwelling unit.  Other looser
definitions refer to the lifestyles of the residents, defining family as
a group of people living and cooking togther, sharing common facilities,
etc.

One reason commonly advanced for these narrow definitions of family is 
"preserving the family character of the neighborhood"  --a goal whose 
constitutionality was strongly affirmed by the Supreme Court in the 1976
case of Vllg of Belle Terre v. Boraas in which the court said:

	The police power is not confined to elimination of 
	filth, stench, and unhealthy places.  It is ample      
	to layout zones where family values, and the blessings
	of quiet seclusion and clean air make the area a 
	sanctuary for people.

(read:  "sanctuary for people who can afford it"  of course.  The rest will
	rot in the inner city)

Anyway, this is to say that a group of student cannot legally take up       
residency in a single family home in a city with laws restricting such a use
unless they get a special use permit from the city.  That is not to say that
they could not:

	1)  Go on living cooperatively for years without being bothered
	    by the city.  (as long as neighbors don't complain)

	2)  Take up residency in at another property in the city in a zone
	    more friendly to such uses.

Hope this cleared some things up.
I do know people who live together and are hardly related.
Isn't it a shame?
Aren't we glad we live in co-ops?


					Jila Handjani
					Bixby Street Co-op
From: peykamp@weber.ucsd.edu (Paul Eykamp)
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Subject: Re: Co-op rent question and Bay area Co-ops
Date: 21 Jul 1992 08:56:26 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego
NNTP-Posting-Host: weber.ucsd.edu

Followup-To:controversly on the net 
Distribution: 
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Keywords: 

If one was going to build more coops for a univeristy, and a good
thing that would be, I would argue for more of the 30-50 person
houses like some of the ones at Berkelely.

I visited a number of them to see how they worked, in case we could
persuade UCSD to build some for the next round of on campus housing,
and most people I talked to indicated that the smaller houses had
fewer problems and  better atmosphere.

My view on apartments in college (and I have lived for four years 
in dorms and four in appartemnts on campus - the glories of working
on a Ph.D.) is that you get to live in a quasi-anti social
enviroment of an appartment all of your life, and only during
college can you have the opportunity (and mostly the desire)
to live with lots of people in this (coop) type of environment.

In any case, in terms of investing scarce coop housing dollars,
if cheap housing is the goal, the savings for group housing
has to be much larger than for appartments, since the whole
idea is to save money on food, living space and general maintenance,
most of which are not very practical from an appartment perspective.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul W. Eykamp  "I'm a grad student, ALL I have are opinions"
quit reading trn and get back to work.
peykamp@UCSD.edu      The conservative voice in the wilderness
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert Abrams <rabrams@igc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Date: 25 Jul 92 10:57 PDT
Subject: Re: Land use law and group homes
Nf-ID: #R:14lvmfINNh7l@darkstar.ucsc.edu:1583836204:cdp:1337700014:000:134
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!rabrams    Jul 25 10:57:00 1992


Lee,

What's to prevent the coop from paying everyone a $1 per year and
calling them employees?

Bob Abrams ZKIX@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
From: 2053nsco@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Subject: Re: Co-ops in Texas
Date: 22 Jul 92 16:46:15 GMT


I'm not sure what types of cooperatives y'all are looking for in
Texas, and what part of the state you want them in.  There are some
informal and formal adult group-house type co-ops in Austin, but I
don't recall where they are right off hand.  If you were looking for
that sort of this you could talk to people at the ICC Austin office.
There is also a mutual housing association in Austin; again, ICC would
know how to get in touch with them.  There is also a really awesome 
food co-op there, the Wheatsville Food Co-op.  It is located at 3101
Guadelupe, Austin, TX  78705; (512) 478-5043.  They would probably
be a good source for other food co-ops in the state, although to be
perfectly honest, I've never heard of any.  If you're looking for
housing co-ops elsewhere, you could contact the National Association
of Housing Cooperatives in Alexandria, VA.  (I'm sorry but I can't
find their number.)  Other than that the only thing I know of is a
low-income co-op in Dallas called Common Ground.  (It's actually a
land trust.)  I'm sure there are more somewhere, but there is no
statewide association of consumer co-ops.  Good luck!

Renee Ordeneaux
NASCO Staff
From: fad@turing.think.com (Franklin A Davis)
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Subject: Re: different rents for different rooms?
Date: 21 Jul 92 10:45:26
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation
	<#2Q-kK=@engin.umich.edu> <35877@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: turing.think.com
In-reply-to: bowdidge@cs.ucsd.edu's message of 21 Jul 92 00:56:26 GMT

The Oberlin Student Cooperative Association (OSCA) selects rooms and jobs
by random lottery.  Membership each year is by a huge lottery.  This can be
painful for people who have been in co-ops for 3 years and get a high
lottery number--but there's enough turnover that all lottery participants
eventually get in from the waiting list.  The only exception is that spaces
are guaranteed to the 3 elected officers, who are elected before the
lottery.  A proportional number of spaces are saved for new students, and a
second lottery is conducted during the summer for them.  Despite the pain
of occasionally losing a very active member for a while, it's a great
system because it prevents the system from being stagnant, and it
encourages new members to try co-ops.

All room selections and job selections are by random lotteries too--the
lottery gives you your number, and then you pick rooms and jobs in that
order, except for very skilled jobs which are elected--head cooks, food
buyers, menu planners.  An interesting twist is that since everyone has two
job assignments, the selection process goes from low to high numbers and
then backwards--so if you get first pick at a job, you also get stuck with
the last job; if you are last in the lottery you get two medium-nasty jobs
:-), not the two worst (*).  If you have an elected job, it counts as your
first selection, so you have to pick a job during the second half of the
selection.

All rooms are charged the same rate.  This is eminently fair in a system
with lots of turnover (guaranteed annual turnover plus the usual
during-the-year moves).  I think such egalitarianism is consistent with the
co-operative principle of "one member one vote".  Each person is "worth"
the same amount, and gets the same chance at privileges; money is handled
equally too.

--Franklin

(This is recounted from when I was an OSCA member and president from
'79-'81.  I visited this year and things feel substantially the same, but
there may have been some changes--anyone with newer info?)

(*) Of course different people have different ideas of what a "nasty" job
    is! 
--
 franklin a davis  Thinking Machines Corp. Cambridge, MA 02142   617-234-2060
 Internet: fad@think.com    uucp: {mit-eddie, uunet}!think!fad  fax: 234-4444
 AppleLink (memos only): fad@think.com@internet#       AppleLink (files): FAD
 Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- write league@prep.ai.mit.edu
From: peykamp@weber.ucsd.edu (Paul Eykamp)
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Subject: Re: Co-op house w/ 4+ unrelated occupants
Date: 30 Jul 1992 08:02:14 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: weber.ucsd.edu
Summary: laws dealing with unrelated occupants
Keywords: coops, laws

It depends on the location as to why the laws were originally
written.  In Missouri they were to eliminate brothels (or try)
whilst in other areas they were often used to keep out fraternity
or sororities.  Recent laws, such as various attempts called
"anti-mini-dorm" legislation have arisen in an attempt by 
people who are foolish enought to live near a university to
keep those meddling kids out of their neighborhood.

In places like San Diego, where rents are quite high, it is often 
necessary to have 4-6 people in a house in order to afford to
live there.  This generally annoys the neighbors, who for some
reason thought that living near a university insured a quiet
neighborhood.  

This issue has been a major one for us here, quite apart from 
any coop issue.  It is however, an important one for the
future of coop housing.

Paul Eykamp
peykamp@ucsd.edu

Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
From: wms@cup.portal.com (W Mark Schneider)
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Subject: Re: Co-op house w/ 4+ unrelated occupants
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 10:33:36 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: usa
  <1992Jul21.065423.7238@sunb10.cs.uiuc.edu> <7495@public.BTR.COM>

> Supposedly these laws were intended to be used against brothels,            
> but can get in the way of other arrangements.

These laws were concocted to deal with COMMUNES and other alternative
living arrangements during the sixties and early seventies.  The question
--Can a municipality or state constitutionally restrict the number
of unrelated adults by zoning laws?--went all the way to the Supreme
Court where Justice William Douglas disappointed us by authoring
the majority opinion upholding the constitutionality of these invasive
laws.

The California courts threw these laws out as violating the California
constitution which has a specific privacy clause.

Mark Schneider
wms@cup.portal.com
From: altenber@acpub.duke.edu (Lee Altenberg)
Newsgroups: alt.co-ops
Subject: Re: Land use law and group homes
Date: 24 Jul 92 03:49:41 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In Durham. NC (home of Duke U. and the only student housing co-op in the
Old South, The Green House Co-op), the single-family zoning permits
no more than 3 unrelated people from living together, NOT
COUNTING EMPLOYEES OF THE HOUSEHOLD.  Which means I can have my
servant living with me, but not my friend.  How's that for class-based
law?
-Lee Altenberg
Civil Environmental Engineering
Duke U., Durham, NC 27706
altenber@acpub.duke.edu
.