HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Jonathan Egre' <jonathan@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: several instrument-specific rec.music groups
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 12:18:26 BST
Distribution: world
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

rsk@aspen.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) writes [edited for brevity - JE]:

> Proposal A: Create rec.music.guitar, and remove alt.guitar.

> Proposal B: Create rec.music.bass, and remove alt.guitar.bass.
> 
> Rec.music.bass would be a one-for-one unmoderated replacement of
> alt.guitar.bass; perhaps its charter would be "Discussion of electric
> and acoustic bass guitar techniques and equipment".

"Rec.music.bass" would *definitely* imply that articles about the instrument 
known as "double bass", "upright bass" or "bass fiddle" were welcome.  
It could also be misinterpreted as an appropriate place to post articles 
about bass singers and "bass-heavy" music in general.

I suggest that "rec.music.bass-guitar" or "rec.music.guitar.bass" would be 
a much better name for your stated intentions.

> Proposal C: Create rec.music.drums.

> Proposal D: Created rec.music.tablature, rec.music.tablature.d and remove
> 	alt.guitar.tab.
> 
> These two groups would be used for posting lyrics, chords, tablature, sheet
> music, and the discussion thereof.  Their charters might be something like:
> 
> rec.music.tablature: Lyrics, chords, and tablature posting ONLY.
> rec.music.tablature.d: Lyrics, chords, and tablature discussion and requests.

"Tablature" is an obscure word to anybody who does not play guitar or bass
guitar (even to many other musicians).  You might find that 
"What style of music do Tablature play, and what albums have they released?"
would become a frequently asked question in "rec.music.tablature".

"Rec.music.guitar.tablature" would be a lot clearer; it would also limit the
discussion to guitar music, but I have a hunch that music for other
instruments cannot be conveniently posted in ASCII anyway.  A group for all
instruments is, as you say, hard to find a good name for; I suggest 
"rec.music.transcripts", "rec.music.makers.transcripts",
"rec.music.sheet-music" or "rec.music.makers.sheet-music".

I am very skeptical of the idea that people will keep "chatter" to a ".d" 
group (unless the "main" group is moderated).

                                    -o-O-o-

Someone else has suggested putting everything under "rec.music.makers";
while this would be tidy, I can't help feeling that names such as 
"rec.music.makers.guitar.tablature" and "rec.music.makers.guitar.classical"
would be unnecessarily long.

                                    -o-O-o-

Good luck!

Jonathan.

--
Jonathan Egre' = jonathan@mantis.co.uk = jonathan_e@cix.compulink.co.uk
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia)
Subject: Re: Alok, soc.culture.indian.american and soc.culture.tamil
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 22:46:59 GMT

In article <BtAvEs.IpM@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>, srini@ireq-num.hydro.qc.ca (Srinivasan K.) writes:
> I voted 'YES' for the soc.culture.indian.american and wished it
> could win. It was perhaps because of the organizer that it lost.
> 
> K. Srinivasan

It lost the second time not because of the organizer (Jose Martinez)
but because of the negative reaction to the selected name and negative 
campaigning from certain Indian quarters about its need.
It was because of the organizer (me) that it passed first time when there
was not so much negative campaigning and organizer successfully put
a coalition of permanent residents and second generation Indian Americans.
Such coalition had been broken by the second vote due to the negative
campaigning among Indians. Furthermore the reaction to the name had grown
significantly more than during the first time.

In either vote the organizer factor was only third in importance.

Alok
From: mduffy@aludra.usc.edu (Michael Duffy)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Help me to create a new group.....
Date: 22 Aug 1992 16:18:55 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu

The news group rec.games.programmer is being torn apart by people complaining
(and probably rightfully so) about a lot of IBM-PC hardware specific questions
usually about the VGA graphics card.  Could someone tell me how to go about
starting a new news group (with the RFD, CFV, vote handling, and any other 
nifty stuff that needs to be done)?  I am specifically thinking about an
alt.vga.programmer group, but this may not be the correct heirarcy.  I believe
that the vga traffic alone on r.g.p can support its own newsgroup, and
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware has much too much traffic to handle this topic well.

All help appreciated.  I have ftp access, so if there is a file containing what
I need to know, please point me in the right direction.

Mike Duffy (mduffy@aludra.usc.edu)
From: forsyth@cstr.ed.ac.uk (Mark Forsyth)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD comp.speech
Date: 19 Aug 92 12:49:17 GMT
Reply-To: forsyth@cstr.ed.ac.uk (Mark Forsyth)
Organization: Centre for Speech Technology Research, Edinburgh University

The proposed group comp.speech is a very good idea.

At the Centre for Speech Technology Research at Edinburgh University
we have a large number of researchers working in all the various
fields mentioned in the charter.  

Speech Technology is a multi-disciplinary field, but definitely a field
in its own right. (as evidenced by the many conferences on Speech
Technology).  It would be extremely valuable to have a forum for the
interchange of ideas and results, especially because it *is* such a
multi-disciplinary field.

At present, many of us do not read the groups such as
comp.ai.neural-nets, comp.dsp, comp.compression,
comp.ai.nlang-know-rep, comp.multimedia and sci.lang because they are
not specific enough to our work for it to be an efficient use of our
time. 

As phoneticians, linguists, human factors specialists, engineers and
computer scientists working in this field, we believe that all the
topics mentioned in the charter *do* belong in a single group.

We would certainly read and contribute to a group such as the
proposed comp.speech.

Mark Forsyth
Rachael Dutton
Paul Taylor
John Elliot
Fabrizio Carraro
Art Blokland
Alex Monaghan
Christina Scott
Briony Williams
Neville Ramsay
Fergus McInnes
Robin Lickley
Eddie Rooney
Ian Nairn
Paul Bagshaw
Alan Crowe
Keith Edwards
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap)
Subject: Re: News group on network and distrib sys mgmt?
Organization: AS&M Inc
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 01:05:35 GMT

In article <714413891snx@merrymeeting.mv.com> ldr@merrymeeting.mv.com (Lee D. Rothstein) writes:

   Netlanders,

   Is there a news group devoted to network and distributed systems
   management?  If there isn't, I'm interested in doing a RFG
   (Request for Group).  How would I go about doing that?

Read the article with Subject: How to Create a New Newsgroup
periodically posted in news.answers, news.admin, news.groups,
news.announce.newgroups, and a few others.  If it's expired at your
site, you can get it via anonymous ftp from rtfm.mit.edu in
/pub/usenet/news.admin/How_to_Create_a_New_Newsgroup .

If you don't have ftp, send mail to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu
with message
send usenet/news.admin/How_to_Create_a_New_Newsgroup

Send message `help' for more info about the mail-server.

--
J Lee Jaap <J.L.Jaap@LaRC.NASA.Gov> +1 804/864-2148
employed by, not speaking for, AS&M Inc, at NASA LaRC, Hampton VA 23681-0001
From: davidd@hobbes.swdc.stratus.com (David Deisley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.music.classical.guitar
Date: 21 Aug 92 23:19:16 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc., San Jose, CA

In article <1992Aug20.143013.4877@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bk233@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jack W. Weinmann) writes:
>
>In a previous article, davidc@brahms.udel.edu (David Casper) says:
>
>>This is a Request For Discussion for "rec.music.classical.guitar"
>
>David, 
>I also agree that the classical guitar deserves its own discussion group. 
>I too regularly read alt.guitar and alt.guitar.tab, but feel that there
>should be a group devoted to classical and, I would hope, flamenco guitar
>information.
>
>Since disciplines are similar, would it not be fit for any style of
>acoustic finger-style playing?  Many people who fingerpick could gain a
>great deal of insight from classically trained or disciplined guitarists.
>
>I am already on the mailing list, but I feel that this group is a VERY good
>idea and will cast my vote FOR it as soon as I see that a CFV is posted for
>it.
>
>Jack W. Weinmann    bk233@cleveland.freenet.edu

I second Jack's suggestion of a group that encompasses not only classical,
but any fingerstyle playing, as I have interests in both.

	
			David Deisley

/////////////////////////////////////////////////
|						|
|						|
|		no parking			|
|						|
|						|
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
From: cory@enigami.mv.com (Cory Kempf)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: 3-week discussion period? (was: RFM: rec.arts.erotica)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 15:20:07 EST
Organization: EnigamI, Inc., Nashua, NH
Reply-To: cory@enigami.mv.com
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v1


In article <1992Aug11.235044.26507@athena.mit.edu> (news.groups), jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.160050.1591@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil>, bkottmann@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil (Brett Kottmann) writes:
>|> 	How many admins would reject a valid vote to change moderators?  Why
>|> would someone reject such a vote?

most admins (speaking from personal experience) generally are quite
content to let the system run itself, unless they are specifically
concerned about the group in question.  Speaking for myself, when
I ran a site with a full feed, I would generally allow the newgroup
messages to go automatically, the rmgroups I would do by hand.  When
I started seeing lots of junked posts to a non-existant group, I would
make the group.  Other than that, I left it alone.  I suspect that
many (most?) other sysadmins work on the same system, more or less.

So if someone wanted to create a new group, it would be created. 
If there was traffic, it was a group.  If not, who cares?  (I would
also periodically nuke groups that had no traffic, to save inodes).

>Because there is no precedent for it?

A precident is set when someone does something for the first time.
Using this as an excuse means that you are allowing someone who is
not here, who had less information, to think for you.

+C


-------------------------------------------------------------
Cory Kempf                    EnigamI, Inc.
cory@enigami.mv.com           ...!decvax!enigami!cory
Annon:	wi.5036@wizvax.methuen.ma.us

"F' cryin' out loud, it's *your* life; shouldn't you at least examine 
your lifestyle values to see if they are really what *you* want."
										--Keith Lim
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: changing a newsgroup's moderator
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:43:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: desire.1992Aug14.104304.3460
 <1992Aug11.110323.1585@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil> <1992Aug12.144005.5291@awdprime.austin.ibm.com>
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1992Aug12.144005.5291@awdprime.austin.ibm.com>, huggins@dss1.austin.ibm.com (Jim Huggins         (8-8305)) writes:
> Ok.  Let's try proposing a specific set of new rules to handle what
> for lack of a better term I'll call a "hostile takeover" of a 
> moderated newsgroup.  I always find it much easier to criticize
> a specific proposal rather than some vague, ethereal idea.
> 
> Disclaimer: I'm literally thinking this up as I type it in.
> 
> 1) Person interested in assuming new moderator duties contacts
>    old moderator and inquires about becoming the new moderator.
>    If old moderator agrees, transfer is made with suitable 
>    fanfare and process ends.  If old moderator does not agree,
>    proceed to step 2.
> 
> 2) Person conducts a "petition drive".  Person posts a request
>    for support for removing the current moderator to relevant
>    news groups.  Person must receive (through e-mail) 100 
>    messages in support of removing the current moderator 
>    within 30 days of the original posting.

	The problem with N statements of support is that an arbitrary number
will probably mean that low volume/low reader groups that have less than N
regular readers will never get a valid petition.
	However, this 100 vote limit is already built in to the RFD/CFV
process.

> 3) If petition drive gathers 100 signatures, an official RFD
>    for changing the moderator is posted to the usual places
>    (including news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, and the
>    affected moderated group), along with the petition signatures.
> 
> 4) Standard RFD/CFV procedure is then followed.

	The above is my main objection to adding another step, whether it be a
straw poll, petition drive or whatever.  Adequate support will be shown during
the CFV (or not shown :).

	The question that keeps coming back is why add another step?

	Good moderators will receive sufficient support during the RFD phase as
to make votes unlikely.  If you want a guarantee against harassment RFDs, then
simply change the guidelines to say
	"...new RFDs are not to be made until at least six months after the
last RFD..."
	Then you get six months between RFDs, and not just votes.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RESULT: rec.bicycles reorganization passes
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:53:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: desire.1992Aug14.105337.3463
Followup-To: news.groups
Distribution: na
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <56804@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, flip@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Phillip Russell) writes:
> In article <1992Aug13.132659.21549@source.asset.com> parksd@source.asset.com (Don Parks) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug13.044251.9828@uunet.uu.net> les@sail.stanford.edu (Les Earnest) writes:
>>>  rec.bicycles.marketplace
>>>  rec.bicycles.tech
>>>  rec.bicycles.rides
>>>  rec.bicycles.soc
>>>  rec.bicycles.racing
>>>  rec.bicycles.misc
>>All I can say is you all FUCKED up!!!
>>Good luck at keeping the posts in the correct groups according to
>>charters.  I think people, especially those coming in for the first
>>time are going to be clueless as to where to put there posts.
>>
>>Let the confusion and cross posting begin !!!!!
>>
>>Don (the pissed of mountain biker/tourer) Juan
> 
> I agree a little. TECH, RACING, and MISC seem to be good groupings, but
> I don't know about the rest. If we're gonna divide up into such specific
> groups, WHERE'S REC.BICYCLES.COMMUTING?

	r.b.misc, what's the problem?  You guys never been organized? :)

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dtasman@dante.nmsu.edu (Dan Tasman)
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.transit
Organization: New Mexico State University
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 01:45:54 GMT

ilana@kiowa.scd.ucar.edu (Ilana Stern) writes:

> how 'bout misc.transp.alt, or misc.alt.transp or misc.transp.planning

It would go against a .planning heirarchy that's currently in the alt area.   
Currently there's alt.planning.urban, with the intent of expanding it (if  
there's traffic to warrant it) to alt.planning.transportation,  
alt.planning.housing, and so on.  If there's enough interest, a discussion for  
creating a soc.planning, sci.planing or talk.planning heirarchy would be  
considered.

I'm surprised to see RFD - whatever.transit messages go into virtually every  
group except alt.planning.urban ...

--
   Dan Tasman                                       dtasman@dante.nmsu.edu
                                                     molson@rever.nmsu.edu
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   "I think that I shall never see a billboard lovely as a tree
    Indeed, unless the billboards fall, I'll never see a tree at all."
                                                                Ogden Nash
From: aryeh@cash.ucsc.edu (Aryeh Friedman)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Time for a formal RFD on mass rmgrping?
Date: 12 Aug 92 22:36:08 GMT
Organization: Mars
NNTP-Posting-Host: cash.ucsc.edu

We seem to have come to some agreement.  Mr. Cline seems to have the best
basic purposal, which is somekind of CFR (Call for Removal), all we need to
do it is set the procerural rules for how do a CFR.  I agree with the person
who said RFD's are needed.  One last note the CFM (Call for change in Moderator)
seems to be a different issue so a seprate RFD is needed. So in short should I
draft a formal RFD and post it here and to news.announce.newgroups. Also, please
tell me if there are any other groups that it should be posted to.
-- 
Aryeh M. Friedman, Just an other bum from net land.
"Thats not a widget it is an intearctive template of some strange kind"
aryeh@cash.ucsc.edu or sarek@tmi (as in the mud)
Xref: sparky news.groups:16966 rec.games.netrek:5553
From: mehlhaff@soda.Berkeley.EDU (ERic Mehlhaff)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.games.netrek
Subject: Re: CFD anyone? ( split off a rec.games.netrek.programmer?)
Followup-To: news.groups
Date: 19 Aug 92 02:22:53
Organization: The U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
	<34477@cbmvax.commodore.com> <16scvdINNccn@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: tom@soda.berkeley.edu's message of 19 Aug 1992 02:51:25 GMT


In article <16scvdINNccn@agate.berkeley.edu> tom@soda.berkeley.edu (Tom Holub) writes:



   If you people are serious about a reorganization, I suggest you read the
   guidelines posted in news.groups (amongst other places) and get a real
   RFD going.  Discussions of this sort should take place in news.groups, 
   and I have directed followups there.

   I would be against a split; I don't think the current volume warrants one.
    -Tom

I more or less agree, except that I read enough newsgroups without needing
to add news.groups to the list...

There more-or-less already is a netrek programmer mailing list  (for the 
NBR effort), but it's volume is _way_ low, hardly justifying a newsgroup.
  I think a lot of the discussion in this group is important to let the
 players know what is in the works as far is improvements to the game 
and to get some feedback from the players.

	If the history of the netrek newsgroup is of any relevence, it started
out as a mailing list with a distribution that grew at a phenomenal rate.
We eventually realized we had enough news to justify an alt. newsgroup.
As that exploded, we reached the current state where a rec. newsgroup
has taken its place.
Maybe it's not relevent, and I'm just up too late.  ;-)

Eric mehlhaff, netrek hacker

--
ERic mehlhaff					Hoser at large
mehlhaff@soda.Berzerkeley.EDU
mehlhaff@ocf.berkeley.EDU
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: changing a newsgroup's moderator
Organization: Amherst College, Amherst MA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 04:10:19 GMT

In article <1992Aug11.203034.4481@bradley.bradley.edu> pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman) writes:

>The fact of the matters is that alt.sex.stories was created in part
>due to the lack of response from SUBMITTED stories to rec.arts.erotica.

No, it was created because of low volume in rec.arts.erotica.  I
recommend that you read back through some of the stories posted there
and see how many have been posted to rec.arts.erotica in the past; I
suspect that the ratio will be extremely close if not equal to zero.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / "Bisexual just means you pay for it."
\  / twpierce@amherst.edu      /  
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /   -- Rock Hudson
From: esr@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: comp.society.folklore - another problematic moderated group
Date: 23 Aug 92 05:12:01 GMT

In <1992Aug22.201907.17661@sq.sq.com>, Mark Brader wrote:
>The remaining case is that nobody is posting anything to the newsgroup.
>Frankly, this is what I believe is happening.  In fact, I predicted it;
>during the creation debate I asserted that having a moderated group in
>parallel with an unmoderated one just doesn't work.  In this case the
>unmoderated group is ALT.folklore.computers rather than a true Usenet,
>but the effect is the same.

Mark's guess is correct, and I agree with his analysis.  Since the creation of
the group over a year ago, I have received a grand total of six (6)
submissions.  By contrast, it's a rare day when a.f.c gets fewer than 20
postings.

There were some propagation problems with c.s.f.  Still may be --- but no one
has submitted to it in many months, so I haven't felt impelled to test.

>If it is in fact the case that nobody is submitting articles to comp.-
>society.folklore, then I would like to propose that it be demoderated
>and become a replacement for alt.folklore.computers; or as a second
>choice, that it be removed outright.  As I have not yet posted to news.-
>announce.newsgroups, these proposals should be considered preliminary.

I endorse the first proposal.  C.s.f wasn't my idea; I was asked to moderate it
by the person who originally pushed it through the creation process, because
of my work on _The_New_Hacker's_Dictionary_.  I would have preferred an
unmoderated c.s.f even then, and announced a no-editing policy.

I'd like to see c.s.f de-moderated and a.f.c aliased to it, so the flourishing
culture of a.f.c regulars can move painlessly into the comp hierarchy.

It's not clear to me that this requires a vote.  No newsgroup creation is
involved, and the success and relatively high quality of a.f.c are well-
established facts.  Mark is right; moderation of c.s.f was simply a mistake.
Let's fix it.
-- 
					Eric S. Raymond <esr@snark.thyrsus.com>
From: shz@garage.att.com (Keeper of the 'Tude)
Subject: Re: RESULT: rec.motorcycles.harley passes 362:47
Organization: Office of 'Tude Licensing
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:22:24 GMT

In article <Bt4wsr.5D1@uunet.uu.net>, ciotti@nas.nasa.gov (Robert B. Ciotti) writes:
>  Rec.motorcycles.harley passes 362 yes votes to 47 no votes.

Good has triumphed over evil!  Thanks to those that voted in favor of
the subgroup (or abstained) and shame on those that tried to stifle other 
people's religious freedom.

----------
Seth Zirin
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Impropriety in soc.culture.tamil vote (Re: soc.culture.tamil
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Distribution: news
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 23:21:20 GMT

dseal@armltd.co.uk (David Seal) writes:
>But it isn't your opinion that counts, it's the general opinion of
>sysadmins. 

In other words...if you ain't part of the clique...your out of luck. 

>So to overturn the vote, you need one of the following:
>  * Evidence that the vote-taker himself campaigned for votes;
>  * Evidence that he disclosed something about how the vote was going to
>    another person.

There is no such thing as solid evidence here on the net...where articles
and mail can be forged willy-nilly. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

                  "Better to be safe than to be sorry" 
   is a remark of value only when these are the actual alternatives.
Xref: sparky news.groups:16972 alt.appalachian:618