HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jfurr@polaris.async.vt.edu (Joel K. Furr)
Newsgroups: news.groups,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: talk.politics.usa.conservative (Was: Re: RFD: talk.politics.patriot)
Date: 23 Dec 92 00:22:13 GMT
Organization: Virginia Center for Lemur Fandom (subscribe to alt.fan.lemurs TODAY)

In article <BzoDI0.8EA@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) writes:
>jfurr@polaris.async.vt.edu (Joel K. Furr) wrote:
>> Again, I think people should stop tarring the right wing with the brush of
>> "retrogressive" or "larouche".  I consider myself moderate to liberal but
>> find it surprising that people who apparently are my ideological peers
>> somehow don't feel that the people on the other side of center have a
>> right to their views.  Remember the old "I disagree with what you say, but
>> will defend to the death your right to say it" line?  It applies here.
>
>For crying out loud.  How the heck am I supposed to interpret a proposal
>like Brian's?  I genuinely do not have the faintest clue whether the
>"patriot movement" is a lobbying organization with a membership of a
>million and paid staff of 50 or something that exists only in his brain
>after watching Red Dawn once too often.  If he really meant something like
>"talk.politics.republican" (your interpretation, though his proposal for
>the Gold Standard as an issue is not something I've heard of them making
>recently), why on earth didn't he say that?  His proposals *do* cover the
>range of outfits I mentioned; if he means something more specific, it's
>for him to say what it is.

Well, read the newspaper.  I've read in the paper and seen on TV where
Republican candidates and "members of conservative think tanks" decry our
leaving the gold standard as some crypto-liberal-Democratic plot to destroy
the world and call for us to return to it. I can't speak for Brian, not
*being* Brian, but to me, Brian's proposals sounded like he was calling for
a conservative politics talk group. 

>> Given that the Republican party and right-wing organizations such as the
>> NRA aren't suffering for membership, I think a USENET group called
>> talk.politics.usa.conservative would be read and used by a lot of people. 
>
>Well, as other people have pointed out, there are already lots of
>newsgroups devoted to that kind of politics: talk.politics.guns or
>alt.individualism, for two, and (de facto) talk.politics.misc.  So if this
>one's different, what makes it so?

Again, the old "well, there's a misc group, talk about it there" argument.
Why don't we discuss *everything* in soc.misc, sci.misc, comp.misc, etc.
etc. etc?

I would not be a participating reader of talk.politics.usa.conservative,
strongly disagreeing with most of the stands Brian's original proposal
seemed to outline as topics for discussion, but I certainly think there
would be hundreds of people who *would* participate.
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.misc
From: bschlesinger@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (Barry Schlesinger)
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL:  Yes votes >= 200+2*No Votes
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 13:50:00 GMT

In article <id.8V2W.XV9@ferranti.com>, peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes...
>In article <EMCGUIRE.92Dec23110313@fuller.intellection.com> emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire) writes:
				...
> 
>> is that mailing
>> lists are generally of better quality in terms of s/n ratio.  I also
>> think that mailing lists are accessible to more people than
>> newsgroups.
> 
>To *different* people. I can follow dozens of groups, but I have a hard
>time dealing with more than a handful of mailing lists.
>-- 

This point illustrates another issue that needs emphasis.  Peter da
Silva is not the only one who feels this way about the group vs. list
tradeoff.  There may be a number of people out there who would monitor
a newsgroup on a particular topic but would not subscribe to a mailing
list.  So, the size of the mailing list may be smaller than the number 
of people who would read a newly created newsgroup.  The vote is the 
way to see.

				Barry Schlesinger
				NSSDC/NOST FITS Support Office
				(not speaking for NASA)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.misc
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL:  Yes votes >= 200+2*No Votes
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 01:32:57 GMT

In article <EMCGUIRE.92Dec23135808@fuller.intellection.com> emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire) writes:
> I agree that volume, per se, is not the criterion to use.  What is
> actually wanted is the number of sites where someone is reading the
> group.

That is what the "vote" is intended to find out. That's why it's a bad idea
to vote YES if you're not interested in the topic, or NO if you just think
it's not going to have enough readership. Because your vote is simply
noise in the signal.

I disagree that the number of *sites* is important. Multiple readers of
a mailing list cause as much traffic on the net whether they're on one site
or many.

Another thing you need to consider is that very few, if all, sites carry
all groups. Sites tend to carry groups that the readers of the site are
interested in. So...

> If news should not be carrying limited readership topics, then a
> proposal should show evidence that this would not be the case.

Limited readership groups will have a limited distribution, *IF* the
group is well-named. Which is why votes against a name (which should be
the majority of NO votes) are so important.

> I don't care what you do at your site, that has nothing to do with it.
> You called on all news admins to ignore my votes.

Actually, I called on all news admins to ignore *any* votes they considered
noise. Including mine, if that's your bent.

> (By the way, I was impressed.  Self comparison with Hitler is
> one of the more novel invocations of the guy I've seen on the net.)

It's actually an old tradition in news.groups. I think Richard Sexton
started it.
-- 
Peter da Silva                                            `-_-'
Ferranti International Controls Corporation                'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012 USA
+1 713 274 5180                            "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?"

Raise Usenet Quality, your vote only counts if you know why you're voting.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: shade@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Douglas Shade)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.autos.vw reorganization
Reply-To: shade@chdasic.sps.mot.com
Organization: Motorola SPS ASIC, Chandler, AZ
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 19:58:09 GMT


>This is a formal Request for Discussion regarding the establishment

Hey can we please give this a rest for a while.  Most of the air cooled
articles are being posted with a "[A]" on the subject line.  That makes
it really easy to find the article of interest.

I'm afraid that if we split, a lot of news feeds will be lost due to 
lack of volume (it does happen).  Lets keep using the [A] & [W] convention
and none of us will have to burn any more BTUs in discussion of this.

I am an air cool fan, but lets face it; there are not enough articles 
covering air to justify a split.


---
shade@chdasic.sps.mot.com                        \/
602-821-4096                                    \/\/...its not a car
From: ciaran@aldhfn.akron.oh.us (Skip Watson)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: soc.culture.native
Distribution: world
Reply-To: ciaran@aldhfn.akron.oh.us
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (10.17.92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 21 Dec 92 00:03:50 EST
Organization: Auldhaefen Associates

In article <1992Dec20.171317.17017@urartu.sdpa.org> dbd@urartu.sdpa.org (David Davidian) writes:
> A problem I see with anything except Native AMERICAN is that every ethnic
> conflict in the universe just might be dumped in a newsgroup with names such
> as soc.culture.native, s.c.aboriginal, etc..

	The same may occur with that one as well since every one born in
America is a native American and there will be non-First People that will
use it as their own :-(.

> I feel the native peoples of the Americas should have their newsgroup, if they
> require it, and one that is not ambiguous in character.

	I don't like the use of the term "native American" for the People.
It just grates on my nerves. I'm sure many of them agree.
	The term native just won't fly. *Everyone* is native to somewhere
and there will be problems with that term.

	The readers of news.groups are not your average run-of-the-mill
reader. It is necessary to look at how the average user is going to view
the names. How many people will know that aboriginal means original people
or will even bother to look it up? I know many people that will equate this
name with aboriginie and think the group is about Australia and ask about
kangaroos.

	Personally I'd throw a curve ball and use something like
soc.culture.first-people.xxxxx or just soc.culture.first.xxxxx. It will
make the average person think first and maybe even read the group :-).


One who doesn't like native, indiginous, or aboriginal :-).
Skip
--
Internet: ciaran@aldhfn.akron.oh.us    UUCP: ciaran@aldhfn.UUCP
Auldhaefen Associates                  Email: auldhaefen@aldhfn.akron.oh.us
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: Rec.arts.cinema : rmgroup?
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 92 20:52:19 GMT
Organization: Usenet Power Elite: Crush-The-Innocent-Newbies Strike Team

TWChan@lbl.gov (Terry Chan) writes:

> You propose rmgrouping a group because as of now in your newsreader it
> has no posts?  Sheesh. 

I'm subscribed to rec.arts.cinema and can't recall having seen a post
come over the group in nearly a year.  Either the group is dead or my feed
is missing things; if you've got evidence of the latter, by all means,
please share it with us.

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: Ashley@chaz.demon.co.uk (Charles Ashley)
Subject: what happened to rec.arts.erotica??
Distribution: world
Organization: Learned Information (Europe) Ltd.
Reply-To: ashley@chaz.demon.co.uk
X-Mailer: Simple NEWS 1.90 (ka9q DIS 1.19)
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 15:06:52 +0000


Is <rec.arts.erotica> still in existence?  Has it been renamed?  I haven't
any news from this group for along time (but i'm getting news from all 
other groups).

charles.

-- 
*****************************************************************************
*                          - Charles Ashley -                               *
*    Internet:   ashley@chaz.demon.co.uk                                    *
*    CompuServe: 71333,624                      tel: +44 (0)71-278-3414     *
*****************************************************************************
From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Geoff Bronner)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Babylon5
Date: 29 Dec 92 13:42:03 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Organization: Amos Tuck School
Disclaimer: I don't represent Dartmouth and Dartmouth doesn't represent me.

In <Blue-Knight.04p3@bknight.jpr.com> Blue-Knight@bknight.jpr.com (Yury German) writes:

>What is the newsgroup that has all the information about upcoming TV movie
>Babylon5. I have no time to look through each of the SCI-FI newsgroups and
>such....

There is no specific group dedicated to Babylon5 discussion but it is
discussed from time to time in rec.arts.sf.tv.

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU - Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business
"Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech
 and assembly....It is the function of speech to free men from the
 bondage of irrational fears." - Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: tbpho@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Lazarus Churchyard)
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: rec.games.cyber renaming and unmoderation
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 17:14:02 EST


I like talking about rules, to a degree. Especially clairifications, and
definately the  errata material that  is occasionaly  posted. I think the
charter of this group should have provisions to perserve such discussion.



		Laz
Newsgroups: news.groups,gnus.emacs.gnus
From: kpc@pluto.arc.nasa.gov (k p c)
Subject: Re: RFD: talk.psychedelic
Originator: kpc@zog.arc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: kpc@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center AI Research and Aero Branches;
	Sterling.
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 08:55:23 GMT

i think "the endless splintering of newsgroups" is a GOOD thing.  the
problem is in news readers.  you should be able to combine small
newsgroups into custom-made virtual groups.

that way people who don't have time for the other splinters can read
the splinters they want to, and you, who want "cross-polination", can
have that too.  everybody wins; nobody forces his way on others, and
nobody has to comply with the taxonomy/classification/ontology of
others.

note that this allows the newsgroup equivalent of multiple inheritance
(directed acyclic graph instead of tree), and reduces arguments about
what hierarchy or subhierarchy a proposed newsgroup should go in.

the only reader that does anything close to this that i know of is nn.
i have been urging the gnus community to do it for gnus (a gnu emacs
newsreader written in lisp), but so far nobody's bitten yet (except
for one partial attempt called gnus-topic).

but other news readers will get it; it'll happen.  in the meantime, i
think we should split away without feeling guilty, even though it's a
pain sometimes.  change is in the nature of things; it's good for us
to accept that.

comments?
-- 
i'm open to comparing research career notes with other young cogsci people.
Xref: sparky news.groups:24939 sci.crypt:6233
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.motss
Subject: Re: Soc.Motss.* (was Re: new newsgroup proposal:talk.politics.motss)
Date: 31 Dec 92 17:41:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: spdcc.1992Dec31.174100.23841
Organization: insert anything here

In article <1992Dec31.061336.26874@ads.com> henry@ADS.COM (Henry Mensch) writes:
>someone wrote:
>->>>	soc.motss.misc	- "classic" soc.motss
>
>why not soc.motss.classic ... in fact, why not just two groups:
>soc.motss.classic (for we, the merry cabalistas) and
>soc.motss.lusing-turistik-skum (for everyone else) ... 

	"we"?????

	Hmmm... maybe soc.motss.wewhothinkweareinthecabal.... ???

	(I won't say which of us this applies to... maybe both?)

BBC
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cdash@moet.cs.colorado.edu (Charles Shub)
Subject: I Did NOT vote twice.........
Organization: University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 00:02:49 GMT

Somebody (from iowa) wrote...
=>  >     (b) 5 votes without names issued from non-personal accounts:
=>  >     vida@chop.isca.uiowa.edu (VIDA Telnet Account)
=>  >
=>  > ... I know Vida personally.  Not that it matters, her vote ought to
=>  > have been counted.

Mark Brader responded...
=>  That was a No vote, so make it 730-151 if you like.  The above was all
=>  I had to go on and it looked to me as though VIDA was an organizational
=>  acronym of some kind.

That somebody then metioned me...
=>  >     582. Shub        cdash@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Charles M. Shub)
=>  > 			/DUPLICATE/ Charles Shub <cdash@moet.cs.colorado.edu>
=>  > ... way to go, University of Iowa.  Vote early, vote often.

Mark explained...
=>  Charles Shub voted twice from his accounts at different sites because the
=>  auto-ack didn't reach him the first time.  This is one of the cases that
=>  I mentioned in at the top of the results report.  Perhaps there was some
=>  problem with all auto-acks to uiowa.edu, and this led to several people
=>  there each voting from different accounts.

Actually, I included a copy of the first message in the second and
noted that I was sending in this message to assure my vote got
counted.  Mark and I has some correspondence and he understands what i
did.  I told him personally that i thought he did a remarkable job af
maintaining poise and integrity during the vote.
-- 

charlie shub  cdash@cs.Colorado.EDU       -or-         (719) 593-3492     
on leave at the University of Iowa  cdash@cs.uiowa.edu (319) 335-0739
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.messianic
From: jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (Joel Furr)
Subject: Re: talk.politics.usa.conservative (Was: Re: RFD: talk.politics.patriot)
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 13:58:45 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.033011.3349@afit.af.mil> wbralick@afit.af.mil (Will Bralick) writes:
>In article <BzqrD5.8JC@polaris.async.vt.edu> jfurr@polaris.async.vt.edu (J. Furr) writes:
>| Which is why I recommend putting the word "usa" in the name.  That way,
>| any Australians who have an idea that conservative means "green" or
>| "nature" politics will look at it and say "'talk.politics.usa.con- 
>| servative'.  Well, that's a group that's about American politics.  Let's go
>| back to aus.conserve and hang out."
>
>But conservatism isn't just an American phenomenon (Edmund Burke is
>credited (by Russell Kirk) as being the first modern conservative 
>and he was Scottish).  Most American conservatives would agree that
>Mrs. Thatcher is a conservative.  Isn't the political party she headed 
>called the Conservative Party?  Did the Aussies think that Mrs. Thatcher
>was a Green?  I personally prefer that the scope of the discussion not 
>be (implicitly) limited to the US.

I'm sorry, but according to Peter da Silva, the word "Conservative" is
used almost everywhere to mean ecological-conservation etcetera, not a
political viewpoint.  Unfortunately, this means that you can't possibly be
right in stating that "conservative" has a political meaning in England
and Scotland.

>| If there were a us. hierarchy, I'd say "put this group there."  But as
>| mail trickles in from people explaining the us. hierarchy to me, I'd say
>| that it's not real likely to be a functioning hierarchy anytime soon. 
>| Thus, the least ambiguous name would be "talk.politics.usa.conservative". 
>
>Yet another consideration is that conservatism is not just about
>politics -- it has a cultural focus, too.  In the West this is usually
>tied to the canon of Western thought (cf. the Great Books of the Western
>World), real (tm) art and music ;-), ethics and morals, etc.  So the
>*.politics.* hierarchy might not be appropriate, either.
>
>So, how about talk.culture.conservative?  Culture is the broader term and 
>this formulation would avoid confusion with the politicized conservation
>movement.

It would also have nothing at all to do with the original point of the
CFD, to discuss issues viewed as "patriotic" by members of the American
political right.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: mike@jammin.nosc.mil (mike pawka)
Subject: Archives
Organization: NRaD
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 17:56:26 GMT

	Is there any site where recent messages for all groups are archived? Our 
news server flushes them rather quickly.

                                      mike pawka   systems programmer 
                                      NRaD San Diego mike@jammin.nosc.mil
                                      cool runnings mon!
From: grb@rbyte.proteus.qc.ca (G. Randolph Bickerton)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: RFD: Sci.crypt.research
Date: 28 Dec 92 14:56:05 GMT
Organization: Right Byte Industries, Ville St-Laurent Quebec Canada

This is my vote for a new group.  Recently, I've noticed too much (many) 
news (items) on RFD.  Hopefully, a specific group will reduce overall net 
use and cross postings.

G. Randolph Bickerton              GRB@rbyte.proteus.qc.ca
P.O. Box 751                       TEL (514)744-5524
Pte-Claire Dorval, PQ  H9S 2L5     FAX (514)748-8109
From: jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: DAVE HAYES MAY BE RIGHT!
Date: 23 Dec 1992 17:48:41 GMT
Organization: AS&M Inc
	<1992Dec20.180554.4592@metrosoft.com>
Reply-To: J Lee Jaap <J.L.Jaap@larc.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cmb00.larc.nasa.gov
In-reply-to: gvh@metrosoft.com's message of Sun, 20 Dec 1992 18:05:54 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.180554.4592@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
   Why would you like to see these only be suggestions
   instead of requirements? It seems to me that a number of
   good ideas regarding the process aren't a matter of
   practice, despite the fact that they have been suggested
   and/or used in the past.  

Being suggested in the Guidelines would be a step up, and many
RFD- and CFV-writers would do them, just because they were
reminded to.  I don't want to introduce a loophole for people
to invalidate a vote because "you should have posted in x.y.z",
where the xxx-writer did not consider x.y.z to be involved.

I consider most informed vote-takers to be conscientious, and the vast
majority would not deliberately choose to not post in a strongly
involved group.  IMHO, separate pointers posted by the xxx-writer or
David Lawrence are not necessary.  Individuals should take the
responsibility of "getting out the vote" by additional postings to
affected groups if they think the current system is not likely to
notify interested parties.

--
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: strong+@CMU.EDU (Thomas W. Strong, Jr.)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.crypt.research
Date: 29 Dec 92 14:19:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.wfECgUK00YUnQXXxo6
	<24000@elevia.uniforum.qc.ca>
Organization: Komitet Gosudarstvennoi Bezopaznosti

alain@elevia.uniforum.qc.ca (W. A. Simon) writes:
> >  The idea of a moderated group has been floating around for a while,
> >  and it appears that there is sufficient support for it.
>         You are projecting a bias here and you are trying to
>         sweep under the carpet a number of opposing views
>         which were clearly and numerously expressed before.
>         Make it the object of a vote as well.  To bundle two
>         issues into one vote is an old trick of politics, but
>         nevertheless a shamefull one.

I did not intend to sweep anything under the rug.  Informal discussion
had begun on sci.crypt o form a new group, and there were a few
suggestions.  a plurality seemed to favor the creation of
sci.crypt.research, (please note, I said "seemed".  I did not take a
poll, and I did not count each and every posting on the matter.  I
looked around for what seemed to be what a large number of people
wanted) and a simailarly large sized group were asking for it to be
moderated.  Since the guidelines for the creation of a new newsgroup
reccomends against conditional votes (i.e. "if the new group passes,
should it be moderated?") in favor of individual questions ("create the
moderated group ...") I phrased the proposal tht way.  Since we are only
at the stage of a request for discussion, and not a call for votes, (and
we won't officially be there until David Lawrence returns from vacation)
if changes need to be made, such as not having the group moderated, or
caling it sci.crypt.theory, or sci.crypt science, or sci.crypt.kibo, we
can change it before it comes to a vote.  If nothing was posted to start
the discussion, we'd still be going in circles back on sci.crypt (and
contributing to the low signal-to-noise ratio that we've all been
complaining about).

 -----------------------------------------------------------------
  Tom Strong              N3NBB              ts49+@andrew.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: Rick.Bronson <Rick.Bronson@mixcom.mixcom.com>
Subject: FAQ for starting a new newsgroup?
Organization: Milwaukee Internet Xchange BBS, Milwaukee, WI U.S.A.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 04:50:04 GMT

Is there a FAQ for starting a new newsgroup?
Thanks

-- 
.------------------------------------------------.
| Rick Bronson			Tel 414-362-2419 |
| Marquette Electronics Inc.	FAX 414-362-3010 |
| 8200 W. Tower Ave.       "The views expressed  |
| Milwaukee, WI 53223           are mine alone"  |
| Internet: Rick.Bronson@mixcom.com		 |
`------------------------------------------------'
Newsgroups: news.groups