HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RESULT: sci.virtual-worlds.apps passes 133:8
Date: 30 Sep 92 02:43:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: pit-mana.JIK.92Sep29224255
	<1992Sep29.172430.20561@zip.eecs.umich.edu>
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <1992Sep29.172430.20561@zip.eecs.umich.edu> huggins@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Jim Huggins) writes:
   In article <1aa023INNsq9@nigel.msen.com> emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti) writes:
   |presumably there are safeguards that help ensure that someone doesn't
   |spoil a vote on an unpopular group over and over so that it's perpetually
   |up for a vote....

   Well -- so far the only grounds we've seen for 'spoiling' a vote has
   has been vote-taker conduct, and usually the vote-taker has an interest
   in wanting the group to pass.  [That's even more so the case here;
   there's probably enough support around for s.v-w.a to pass without a
   re-vote but probably with a lot of bloodshed which will be avoided
   simply by doing it over again.]  I don't think we've got a problem.

On the contrary, the fact that the vote-taker can invalidate the vote
and also ahs an interest in wanting the group to pass is exactly WHY
"we've got a problem."

Ed's point is that the vote taker can do something to invalidate the
vote, such as posting the current tally before the voting period has
ended, if he thinks that there is a risk that the vote will fail, in
order to force the vote to be redone (if, for some reason, he thinks
that a new vote will have a better chance of passing).

My answer to Ed's question is, "Yes, there is a safeguard to prevent
circumventing the rules as you describe.  Its name is `Dave
Lawrence.'"  Personally, I trust Dave's judgment enough to believe
that he will make the right calls when it's necessary to decide
whether to do a revote or to disallow one.  I suspect that the
majority of admins out there feel the same way.

-- 
Jonathan Kamens                                         jik@MIT.Edu
MIT Information Systems/Athena              Moderator, news.answers
    (Send correspondence related to the news.answers newsgroup
        {and ONLY correspondence related to the newsgroup}
                 to news-answers-request@MIT.Edu.)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.marching
From: fath1@husc8.harvard.edu (Michael Fath)
Date: 30 Sep 92 10:46:53 EDT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Sep29.182924.28462@oclc.org> hch@oclc.org (Curtis Hunter) writes:
>In article <BvAK0n.C9B@uunet.uu.net> pae@blackcat.stortek.com (Phil Earnhardt) writes:
>>Request for Discussion
>>
>>Newsgroup: rec.arts.marching
>>
>>Purpose: Discussion of Drum & Bugle Corps, Bands, and Color Guards
>>
>>--phil
>>pae@blackcat.stortek.com
> 
>   I don't know if we've had enough discussion about the naming convention yet  to be issuing a CFD?  No one really addressed the question I raised about Why   to place the group under rec.arts.*.  I used the example of rec.music before,   let me try again.  If you look at the rec.* groups, many of them could be considered arts.  But they do not contain arts in their group name.  Example rec.music.*.  Just wondering why the .arts should be included?
>
> 
I agree.  I don't think there is any inherent reason why arts must be part
of the name.  I'd be happy with a

rec.marching.drumcorps
and the option of a rec.marching.bands



-- 
MM   MM FFFFF 	Michael Fath		fath1@husc.harvard.edu
M M M M F	Dept of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics
M  M  M FFF     Harvard Medical School         
M     M F       Boston, MA 02115				**Enjoy life!
From: rsk@sequoia.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.music.jazz
Date: 26 Sep 92 12:37:40 GMT
Organization: Cardiothoracic Imaging Research Center

In article <Bv4xuu.5uq@uunet.uu.net> heidelj@alleg.edu (Jason Heideloff) writes:
>There is currently a group entitled rec.music.bluenote.  Although this may  
>be the closest thing to a jazz group, it tends to have more discussions  
>pertaining to blues than jazz.

This is extremely interesting, given the recent complaints (from alt.guitar,
of all places) that rec.music.bluenote has way too much jazz and not nearly
enough blues.  At the time these complaints were voiced, I checked the
"Subject" lines of all the rec.music.bluenote articles available on the
news spooler machine here (several hundred articles, going back about
three weeks) and discovered that blues articles constituted about 15%-20%
of the traffic in the group, depending on how one classified certain
articles that might be judged to apply to both or neither.

That's the research that I did, which is admittedly not much.  However,
I have been a reader of rec.music.bluenote since the day it was formed,
and my subjective impression is that this traffic distribution is
probably about the norm.  I would like to know what quantitative
research you have conducted to substantitate your assertion that "it
tends to have more discussions pertaining to blues than jazz".

---Rsk
From: heidelj@alleg.edu (Jason Heideloff)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: r.m.bluenote --> r.m.jazz + r.m.blues (was: rec.music.jazz)
Date: 27 Sep 92 15:20:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: pellns.1992Sep27.152034.560
Organization: Allegheny College

In article <1992Sep26.174326.7070@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>  
jojw@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (John J. Wood) writes:
> I've been a r.m.bluenote lurker for four years, and I have to politely
> disagree about splitting up this newsgroup, and I also politely disagree
> with Richard Shapiro about the ties of blues and jazz.  I've heard a
> number of big-band recordings upon which a blues progression is clearly
> based, for example.  My personal definition of jazz is any form of music  
> that is "out", no matter if it has rock, blues, or fusion influences
> influences; offering the combination of spontaniety, talent, adventure  
and      
> inspiration that provokes your individual sense of listening.  Richard 
> does make a good point about a blues/rock & roll connection,
> but the blues also influences a number of musical genres including
> jazz, fusion, R&B, bluegrass, and folk.  Sometimes, I just like to enjoy
> *music*, and avoid this categorization business in general.  Because
> I'm unconvinced about the proposal, my vote is "no".
> 
> Besides, as one poster noted:  the name of rec.music.bluenote is way        
> cool!:-)
> 
>  John J. Wood                              jojw@uhura.cc.rochester.edu  

Thank you for a kind response!  I value your opinion.

Jason Heideloff
heidelj@alleg.edu
From: carlton@scws8.harvard.edu (david carlton)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD Alternative Medicine
Date: 5 Oct 92 20:53:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: scws8.CARLTON.92Oct5135321
Organization: Citizens for Boysenberry Jam
In-reply-to: grig0009@student.tc.umn.edu's message of Mon, 5 Oct 1992 16:48:40 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.164840.7342@news2.cis.umn.edu>, grig0009@student.tc.umn.edu () writes:
> In article <7492@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:

>> Well, when you can prove that any of the listed "alternative
>> therapies" (I refuse to call it "alternative medicine", since it
>> isn't medicine) works according to the scientific method, including
>> such things as randomized double-blind tests, then you can call
>> them science. I'm open to anything that can be proven
>> scientifically.

> Using the scientific method, it is impossible to prove that something has
> no effect. It is only possible to fail to show an effect.

So what?  That still doesn't mean that things that don't stand up to
such tests are science.

> This seemingly fine distinction is, however, important because the
> failure to show an effect only speaks to the inadequacy or
> inappropriateness of the testing method used to measure a possible
> effect.

It could also "speak to" the failure of the thing being tested to
produce an effect.

david carlton
carlton@husc.harvard.edu

       ..  I see TOILET SEATS...
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: hch@oclc.org (Curtis Hunter)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.marching
Organization: OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 19:48:27 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.225149.15958@husc3.harvard.edu> fath1@husc10.harvard.edu (Michael Fath) writes:
>In article <BvAK0n.C9B@uunet.uu.net> pae@blackcat.stortek.com (Phil Earnhardt) writes:
>>Request for Discussion
>>
>>Newsgroup: rec.arts.marching
>>
>>Purpose: Discussion of Drum & Bugle Corps, Bands, and Color Guards
>>
    [stuff deleted]
>
>rec.arts.drumcorps
>or
>rec.arts.marching.drumcorps
     ^^^^^

  I have suggested several times that the .arts be taken out to form a name of  rec.marching.drumcorps.  This would allow groups such as rec.marching.hs-bands  to be created under the rec.marching heirarchey (sp? I'm tired).  I know that in another post Phil states that the new group should fall under one of the       subgroups of rec, like music or arts.  The are many groups that do not follow   this naming convention.  One right off the top of my head would be rec.aquaria. If it had followed the same con


>
>I strongly support the creation of a new newsgroup for drum corps and one
>for marching bands.
>
>I argue that rec.arts.marching is not a preferable name because it is not
>informative enough.  I suggest instead that two groups be created:
>
>rec.arts.marching.drumcorps
>rec.arts.marching.bands
>
   I feel that another possible solution would be to create a group named       rec.marching.misc.  Then as traffic on that group increased, CFD's could be     issued for new groups.


   If there is the need for a straw poll to be taken, I'll volunteer to do the  counting.  Just let me know.


_______________________________________________________________________________
|                                                                             |
|  Curtis Hunter                      curtis@sporty.col.oh.us                 |
|  Online Computer Library Center     hch@sppy00.UUCP                         |
|  Dublin, OH                         CIS  76040,2605                         |
|  (614) 764-6325                                                             |
|_____________________________________________________________________________|
From: jfurr@vtssi.vt.edu (Joel Furr)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: not everybody uses UNIX to read news
Date: 6 Oct 1992 19:50:24 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

rpwhite@ac13.cs.nps.navy.mil writes:

>jfurr@vtssi.vt.EDU (Joel Furr) writes:
>
>>Somewhere in the news.announce.newusers files that get posted, there's a
note
>>to the effect that it's bad manners to assume that everyone reads news on a
>>UNIX box somewhere.  
>
>Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzztt!!!!!!!!
>
>What that note really says is that it is bad manners to read news on other
>than a UNIX box. It's even worse manners to discuss your software
>shortcomings on the net.

Gene Spafford (spaf@cs.purdue.EDU) writes in news.announce.newusers:

>11. Usenet is not a UNIX network.
>
>    Don't assume that everyone is using "rn" on a UNIX machine.  Among
>    the systems used to read and post to Usenet are Vaxen running VMS,
>    IBM mainframes, Amigas, and MS-DOS PCs.

Thus, as we can see, rpwhite is not only misinformed and has chosen to post
about it to the net so we can all smile tolerantly at his failings.

Killfiles are NOT mandatory for USENET participation; if you set yourself up
as an expert on USENET and go around claiming that if someone doesn't use a
UNIX newsreader, he's at fault, you pretty quickly show yourself to be less of
an expert and more of a didactic fool.

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cs_jh@cox.nsac.ns.ca (Dr Jeff Hoyle)
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.chem.organomet
Organization: NS Agricultural College
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 12:16:00 GMT

In article <19ifaeINN1kf@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> fau@po.CWRU.Edu (Francis A. Uy) writes:
>From: fau@po.CWRU.Edu (Francis A. Uy)
>Subject: Re: RFD: sci.chem.organomet
>Date: 20 Sep 1992 18:18:54 GMT
>
>cabku01@mailserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de (Hartwig Kuehbauch) says:
>
>>especially related to chemistry. To my knowledge there are only the
>>groups
>>         sci.chem
>>         sci.engr.chem
>
>Valid point:  small number of groups about chemistry
>Counterpoint:  Are they being used much now?
>
>>It's a pity that normally these lists and groups didn't support special
>>parts of chemistry, such as organic-, inorganic- or physical-chemistry.
>>
>>Another major part of todays chemistry is held by organometallic chemistry.
>
>>         sci.chem.organomet
>>
>>This newsgroup could be a home for all chemists who work on organometallic
>>chemistry, but also for all people who work on organic chemistry, because
>>an organometallic chemist is always an organic chemist too!
>
>You know, seeing as sci.chem has NO subgroups at all
> yet, perhaps you do a more general split rather than
> such a specific topic.  How about:
>
>sci.chem.orgo
>sci.chem.inorg
>sci.chem.phys
>sci.chem.misc
>
>or some such arrangement, based on whichever fields have
> the most support.  Just that IMHO having s.c.orgomet
> without already having s.c.orgo seems kind of silly.
>-- 
>Francis A. Uy			now a Bawlmorean, hon.
>Program Director, WUMD		ISO part time job to pay the rent.


I agree with the sentiments expressed in this posting
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.bluenote
From: mingus@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Damballah Wedo)
Subject: Re: r.m.bluenote --> r.m.jazz + r.m.blues (was: rec.music.jazz)
Organization: The Poto Mitan in the Houmfor
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 17:07:07 GMT

> rshapiro@bbn.com (Richard Shapiro) (in <RSHAPIRO.92Oct1122430@kariba.bbn.com>):
>                                          What I've been saying is that
> the blues *articles* on r.m.bluenote has not had much overlap with the
> jazz *articles*. That's all. The discussion on r.m.bluenote has
> followed the usual pragmatic distinction between jazz and blues. I've
> never even remotely implied a lack of cross-fertilization in the
> music itself.

Hmm. If I understand this, jazz and blues MUSICS are intertwined, but
jazz and blues CONVERSATIONS are separable, and therefore should be
separate. 

If this is your position, I think it makes no sense. If the musics
are connected, we as fans had *better*, IMO, be talking about them
as connected, otherwise we're missing the point, aren't we? If
conversations about the musics are separable, that's a measure of the
degree to which we need *more* cross-fertilization in talking to
each other, isn't it?

And even if one buys the first part of the argument, the second part
does not follow. Even if the conversations are separable, why exactly
must they be separate? Cross-posting would be an inefficient and
artificial mechanism to restore a small part of something that exists
already.

Lastly, the emphasis that Richard's is the pragmatic position implies that
there is a problem here that must be solved. I have not heard any sort
of convincing problem statement other than various forms of "I don't want
to have to wade through stuff I'm not interested in." As someone else
(Rich Kulawiec?) has pointed out, that "problem" exists in every newsgroup,
most newsreaders have simple mechanisms to help the user deal with it,
and the volume of r.m.bluenote is small (17 articles from Wednesday to
Thursday, 30 from Thursday to Friday; these totals include all the stuff
not related to music, like this topic) so the magnitude of the "problem"
is also small. So what's the issue here?

I'll reiterate my belief that dividing music into categories in a bad
thing in general, and a very bad thing when it comes to jazz and blues
(and soul and gospel and...) because these musics, as Richard as much as
admits in the last sentence quoted above, are not separable. I'll also
reiterate my belief that at the bottom of this effort to split the group
is the narrowminded desire to exclude anything that is not exactly what
one is interested in. That in turn is the worst thing of all.
-- 
Marcel-Franck Simon             	mingus@usl.com, usl!mingus

	" Papa Loko, ou se' van, ou-a pouse'-n ale'
	  Nou se' papiyon, n'a pote' nouvel bay Agwe' "
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: CFD for *.apathy newsgroups
Date: 2 Oct 1992 03:01:37 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <9209300742.AA14369@deepthought.cs.utexas.edu> FURRJK@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU (Joel Furr) writes:
>I am issuing a CFD for a series of *.apathy newsgroups, as follows:

Who cares, anyway?
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
    Vote for a REAL change on 3 November: Throw out the check-bouncing,
  tax-and-spend Democrat Congress! (obviously, not an opinion of UTHSCH)
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: andyrose@netcom.com (San Francisco Fractal Factory)
Subject: Straw POLL soc.religion.quaker
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 01:55:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 


There is no unity on the issue of moderated versus
unmoderated so I want to hear from you.  I think
that this group should be called soc.religion.quaker
due to previous discussions and the semantics
of the other soc.religion groups.  The issue
of whether the group is moderated or not should
not affect the name.  If there is a tradition of
soc.religion.* groups being moderated it is certainly
not very old and certainly not cast in stone.

So let me know if you like
soc.religion.quaker - unmoderated
soc.religion.quaker - moderated 
talk.religion.quaker - unmoderated

If we're going to burn by letting the doors
open, it certainly wouldn't be the first time,
nor the last, and so what anyway, we can shut
the doors later.


from Brinton, Guide to Quaker Practice
  The Society of Friends has never issued specific
instructions regarding what the worshiper should do
during the silence, believing that such instructions
would limit the freedom of the Spirit which,
like the wind, 'bloweth where it listeth.' 

  ...
  In matters of [the spoken word] no rules
can or ought to be given.  The following
characteristics of an acceptable spoken message
are suggested as possibly valid in most cases.
{religious, spontaneous, non-personal,
non-argumentative, simple, brief, unified}

 The value of an utterance depends quite as much 
upon the the listener as upon the speaker.  Sometimes
the hearer loses help which he might have received
had he been sympathetic and sensitive instead
of critical and hardened.  If a speaker is
difficult to tolerate, he presents nevertheless a real
opportunity for the cultivation of forbearance.

 
My preferance: soc.religion.quaker -unmoderated!

-- 
Andrew Rose andyrose@netcom.com FAX 4155537756 When peace rules the planet
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RESULT: sci.virtual-worlds.apps passes 133:8
Date: 1 Oct 92 00:58:24 GMT
 <1992Sep29.054217.6972@u.washington.edu> <1a9kqvINNd1h@stanley.cis.Brown.EDU>
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1a9kqvINNd1h@stanley.cis.Brown.EDU>, plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak) writes:
> In article <1992Sep29.054217.6972@u.washington.edu> cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) writes:
> ...
>>But we have have this pseudo-democratic thing to adhere to (enforced
>>by little dictators), so let's get on with it.
>>
>>Bob Jacobson
>>One proposer of two, sci.virtual-worlds.apps
> 
>    Except for a brief emailed note to Bob, the vote taker, when his
> unfortunate mistake occurred, I've kept silent on this.  However,
> the sniping and denigration which he continues to air both here and
> in the newsgroup he moderates has jarred me out of my apathy.
>    Here's the deal, Bob: You fucked up.  You jumped into something
> you obviously weren't fully informed about, and ended up tripping
> over your ignorance.  You have nobody to blame but yourself.  Why
> don't you show some good sense, admit you messed up, learn from
> your mistake, and stop trying to blame everybody else for what is
> strictly your error.

	Ahhh, Bob's right, you're wrong.

>    Personally, I'd like to see the group pass.  But the attitude
> expressed by the vote taker in this instance convinces me that the
> few guidelines which exist should be followed as closely as possible.
> Making exceptions only opens the cracks yet wider for the Aloks out
> there to weasel through.

	It's a dictatorship.  Sugar coat it all you want, but since when does
the defintion of democracy include "voidable by one person"?

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Xref: sparky news.groups:18722 alt.religion.kibology:4123 alt.config:6043
From: csquared@coos.dartmouth.edu (C Squared)
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.religion.kibology,alt.config
Subject: Re: RFD Alternative Medicine
Date: 5 Oct 92 04:36:35 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Originator: csquared@coos.dartmouth.edu

In article <BvMqAL.CHD@world.std.com> kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry) writes:
>In article <1992Oct4.181039.3224@netcom.com> sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
>>No, I think "alt.medicine" is perfect. That will place it right where it
>>belongs, next to "alt.alien.visitors" and "alt.kibology".
>I humbly second Mr. Sheaffer's call for the creation of alt.kibology.

I think it should be kibology.alt
We'll just create a new hierarchy

C Squared
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jvbutera@grad04.math.ncsu.edu (Jeffrey V. Butera)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.marching
Organization: NCSU Mathematics Dept.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 17:04:01 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.104653.15966@husc3.harvard.edu> fath1@husc8.harvard.edu (Michael Fath) writes:
*In article <1992Sep29.182924.28462@oclc.org> hch@oclc.org (Curtis Hunter) writes:
*>In article <BvAK0n.C9B@uunet.uu.net> pae@blackcat.stortek.com (Phil Earnhardt) writes:
*>>Request for Discussion
*>>
*>>Newsgroup: rec.arts.marching
*>>
*>>Purpose: Discussion of Drum & Bugle Corps, Bands, and Color Guards
*>>
*I agree.  I don't think there is any inherent reason why arts must be part
*of the name.  I'd be happy with a
*
*rec.marching.drumcorps
*and the option of a rec.marching.bands

As far as the other folks around (who are interested), I also believe
that rec.marching.drumcorps is a fine name....

*MM   MM FFFFF 	Michael Fath		fath1@husc.harvard.edu
*M M M M F	Dept of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics
*M  M  M FFF     Harvard Medical School         
*M     M F       Boston, MA 02115				**Enjoy life!  
 


-- 
Jeff Butera            DISCLAIMER: I claim absolutely nothing.
Math Graduate Student
N.C. State University    "Still looking for a witty quote." 
jvbutera@math.ncsu.edu                           -Brad Halls
Newsgroups: news.groups