HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban,misc.legal
Subject: Re: The amazing disappearing British Constitution
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:22:24 GMT
Reply-To: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation

In article <1992Nov12.064349.16297@odin.diku.dk>, rancke@diku.dk (Hans Rancke-
Madsen) writes:
> >It should be noted that England is one of the oldest nations on the face of
> >the planet, and it predates literacy by some centuries, which accounts in a
> >large manner for why its constitution is unwritten, and instead relies upon
> >the traditions which served as law for so many generations.
> 
> On the other hand, Denmark, the oldest, does have a written consitution.
>                             ^^^^^^^^^^
>      (Well, we have the longest continuing line of kings, anyway).

Hey, I said "one of the oldest".  Can't you tell weasel-speak when you see it?

a.f.u readers:  Please stop reading at this point.

All others:  :-)


Terry Carroll - tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com - 408/992-2152
The opinions presented above are not necessarily those of a sound mind.
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Salaries+cost of living in UK
Date: 5 Nov 92 12:57:34 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY)
In article <S2QSBBVM@cc.swarthmore.edu>, ment@cs.swarthmore.edu (Andrew Ment)      writes...
>ajj@zycor.lgc.com (Andrew Jackson) writes:
>>Could somebody out there clue me in about Windsor and vicinity? Is
>>housing readily available? If so, where would be a good place to
>>look? Should my parents bother with a car? Questions about basic
>>living in Windsor (if there is such a thing).
>
>I can give a little more help than that.  Windsor is just a short distance
>from London (maybe 30 miles or so from centre of London), and contains one
>of the queen's most impressive castles.  It is a rich area - house prices
>are expensive, rents are quite high, but cheaper than much of London.
>It is very quaint - tea shops (real ones - not the sort you get in the
>Far east!!).

In practice, wouldn't living in the area mean living somewhere
like Slough? (cue Betjeman quote) That would be a lot cheaper,
though less pleasant. You'd only want to live in Windsor if you
valued being right next to work (assuming it actually is in
Windsor, and not somewhere boringly suburban nearby but they
say "Windsor" because it sounds better) and can afford to pay
the premium. Housing is readily available almost anywhere in
England now due to the property crash - many people have
slashed their prices drastically in order to try and get a
sale, others are trapped with mortgages more than could be
raised through sale and are thus forced to rent out their
unwanted properties so there's a glut of rented stuff as well.

Matthew Huntbach
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones)
Subject: Re: Marketing Research in Europe
Organization: Vonnegut Tent Rentals, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 14:14:37 GMT

Gilbert Man-Fai Lau (gilbertl@aludra.usc.edu) wrote:
> Hi,
> 	My friend is working on a marketing research in Europe. I will be
> very appreciated if any of you can answer the following questions? 
>
A little context needed here....
 
> 1. Does any chain-store like Blockbuster exists in Europe?
>
"Blockbuster Video" is a chain of large (i.e. bigger than an average
W H Smugg) video rental outlets.


--
||I dreamed I met a Yadallean          |(parody in progress, apologies to
||A most confusing man....             | Tim Rice & Andrew Lloyd Webber)
||------------------------------------------------------------------------
||Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com)|Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY  |
From: cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk (Colin Wilson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:28:18 GMT
Organization: BT

In article <1992Nov6.100915.2585@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>, mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
|> From: cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk (Colin Wilson)
|> >I would like to be able to use my own language freely in public and
|> >professional life. I would like to be able to read daily newspapers
|> >printed in it. I would like to be able to see and hear a full variety
|> >of radio and TV programming in it, as opposed to the present situation
|> >in which the use of Scots is almost totally confined to comedy.
|> 
|> I could say exactly the same about Cockney.
|> 
|> Matthew Huntbach

Perhaps you ought to - I certainly won't stand in your way. I hope you're not
trying to suggest, though, that Scots stands in relation to (standard)
English in the same way that Cockney does. It does not, for all the reasons
that we've covered in this thread.

********************************************************************************
*  Colin Wilson,                           E-mail:  cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk     *
*  Glasgow Engineering Centre,             POTS:    (041) 220 5340             *
*  British Telecommunications plc.                  (+ 44 41) 220 5340         *
*  7 Caledon Street,                                                           *
*  Glesca / Glaschu G12 9BY,             Scotland a Twa-Leidit Fowkrick        *
*  Scotland / Alba.                      Biodh Alba 'na Poblachd Dha-Chananach *  ********************************************************************************
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Accent, Dialect and Rabbie Burns
Date: 11 Nov 1992 03:43:04 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com


In article <11422@scott.ed.ac.uk>, guy@cogsci.ed.ac.uk writes:
> david@postman.gr.osf.org (David George) writes:
> 
> >Probably... you're beginning to sound like a lager commercial.  A quick poll
> >of the office reveals the knowledge of Burns to be about zero amongst none
> >English speakers.						       ^^^^
> 
> Well, if you didn't poll anybody, it's hardly surprising no one had heard
> of him.

Interestingly, Burns is well known in the ex-Soviet Union.

jon.
From: martin.baines@uk.sun.com (Martin Baines - Sun UK - SE Manager Cambridge)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Can the Prime Minster be Catholic?
Date: 10 Nov 1992 16:42:52 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Ltd
Distribution: world
Reply-To: martin.baines@uk.sun.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: bottomdog.uk.sun.com

In article 14410@dcs.qmw.ac.uk, mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
[deleted earlier thread]
>I don't believe there ever has been a Catholic PM, but there
>have been PMs from other non Church of England denominations
>for whom the same comments could apply.

Not to mention Disrelli who wasn't even Christian he: he was Jewish.

Martin

---
"You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment"

Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager,
Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK
Phone: +44 223 420421                 Fax: +44 223 420257
JANET:     Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun    Other UK:  Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk
Internet:  Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com
X.400:     g=martin s=baines prmd=sunir admd=mci c=us

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: dwilkins@maths.tcd.ie (David Wilkins)
Subject: Re: Can the Prime Minster be Catholic?
Organization: Dept. of Maths, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:25:27 GMT

In article <A.Grant.19.721305196@ucs.cam.ac.uk> A.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:
>Apropos of this, what about the Irish PM and President? Is there any
>constitutional requirement that they _should_ be Catholics? Or would it
>just be very difficult if they weren't?

I cannot recall any protestant Taoisigh.  As far as presidents go, both
Douglas Hyde (first president) and (I think) Erskine Childers were
Church of Ireland.

The constitution did originally make reference to the `special position'
of the Catholic church as the religion of the majority of the citizens,
while acknowledging the main protestant churches also.  This article
was removed from the constitution many years ago, with the backing
of the Catholic church.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones)
Subject: Grauniad headline Shock Horror
Organization: Vonnegut Tent Rentals, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:41:15 GMT

From a recent Grauniad Weekly, above an article describing glaring errors
in the word lists for a French syllabus, the headline:

Grave Problems with French Letters

Now you know why its the Groaniad.

--
||I dreamed I met a Yadallean          |(parody in progress, apologies to
||A most confusing man....             | Tim Rice & Andrew Lloyd Webber)
||------------------------------------------------------------------------
||Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com)|Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY  |
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15526 alt.folklore.urban:27940
From: phil@rahul.net (Phil Gustafson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Can the Prime Minster be Catholic?
Date: 10 Nov 92 02:32:54 GMT
Organization: a2i network

Sheesh, Trelford.  We know you don't like limey politics much.  Just
relax, read your books, take your citizenship test, and vote for or
against Willie Clinton in four years.  We murkins need all the classy
sophisticated voters we can get.

Phil "In 1964, there was a great todo about Nelson Rockefeller, then a
presidential candidate, being divorced.  We all know what happened to
Nelson. But sixteen years later, nobody had any trouble accepting the
divorced Ronald Reagan as the Republican candidate.  Ronny doesn't
speak to any of his children.  That's 'family values' for you" Gustafson

-- 
Phil Gustafson <phil@rahul.net>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: poser@vxcrna.cern.ch (Till Poser  -  ZEUS OFFLINE)
Subject: Re: An astonishing Guy
Summary: Warning, Death of S.C.British imminent!
Reply-To: poser@vxdsyc.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 18:33:17 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.153528.7700@menudo.uh.edu>,
 chem91@Elroy.UH.EDU ("Bill Harrison (713)-743-2789") writes:
 
> [...]
>>Don> 1. What constitutes a "gun nut".
>>
> 
> One who belives that the more guns there are, the "safer"/less crime there
> will be, perhaps??? (and also republican politicians, of course).  ;=)


Gentles, a word of warning! About one year ago, the net.lager.louts of
t.p.guns invaded this nice and couth group with the memorably infamous
thread "No rights in England", which took something like 4 months to be
killed off. I have no desire at all to see this absolutely futile flame
fest restaged in this perfectly charming group, given that the position
of all people concerned will not have changed noticably in the meantime.
I would have You save Your delightful acrimony for British threads.

This discussion has the capacity for metastasising badly, so have a care!

       Till Poser         Internet: poser@vxdsyc.desy.de
-F35- ZEUS DESY/Freiburg  Bitnet:   POSER@DESYVAX
bldg.1b-235, Notkestr.85  Hepnet:   VXDESY::POSER (13313::Poser)
   D-2000 Hamburg 52      Tel.: -49-40-8998-2004
From: cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Private Uni's
Date: 11 Nov 92 12:35:13 GMT
	<1dek3uINN7jo@fido.asd.sgi.com> <1992Nov9.101148.13305@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Scotland

In article <1992Nov9.101148.13305@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:

   It is amazing how the Scots will whinge if you use it to mean "Scotland"
   as well, but if you use it correctly they'll *still* whinge because they
   won't realise you've used it to deliberately used Scotland and can't
   resist getting in a "you're wrong because in Scotland ...".

It's amazing how regularly we hear anti-Scottish whingeing and bleating from
this quarter...
--
	-- Chris. 	cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk   (on Janet, cc@uk.ac.ed.dcs)
From: skaamjm@ucl.ac.uk (Matthew Moore)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Need Internet Address....
Date: 10 Nov 92 14:41:07 GMT
Organization: Bloomsbury Computing Consortium

rsharma@spinner.cs.indiana.edu (Rajesh K. Sharma) writes:

>Hi:
>I have an uncle in Berkshire to who I want to send mail. The only
>details I have are his username and the janet node number he is on.
>Any help on forming the complete address will be greatly appreciated.
>Thank you very much.
>Rajesh Sharma

sharing what you know with us (so we can poke fun at it?) might help.
try :

mail username@janet_node_number < preprepared_file

its probably better to check the FAQs in news.answers, or try a group
with 'comm' in the name, rather than trying here, btw
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Britain doesn't have a Constitution (Re: An astonishing Guy)
Date: 11 Nov 92 22:12:24 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <BxI7LM.54y@ecf.toronto.edu> ambidge@ecf.toronto.edu (Chris Ambidge) writes:
>In article <1992Nov9.211500.1973@pixel.kodak.com> dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
>>Steve McKinty - Sun ICNC (smckinty@sunicnc.France.Sun.COM) wrote:
>>> 
>>> Then again it might just indicate the the British Parliament have the
>>> wit not to pass unconstitutional laws...
>>>
>>This touches on a distinct disadvantage of the US system: that laws may
>>be passed with the full knowledge that they are unconstitutional, simply
>>to please certain pressure groups, in the sure and certain knowledge that
>>the courts will invalidate them in good time.  Flag-burning is the most
>>recent obvious case.  Of course, some dumb cluck has to be set up as the
>>test case, with all the attendant problems.  The most famous 'cluck' of
>>this century was the schoolteacher Scopes in the famous Monkey Trial.
>>He volunteered to be arrested for teaching Evolution in order to force
>>the law to be tested in court.
>
>One problem with your analogy there, Dave:  Scopes was found guilty,
>the Scopes Monkey  Trial  was lost, and the law prohibiting the teaching
>of evolution in (?)Tennessee remained on the books for 42 years.
>-- 
>-------------------------------------------
>Chris Ambidge / ambidge@ecf.toronto.edu / ambidge@ecf.utoronto.ca  
>   chemical engineering / university of toronto
>   200 college st / toronto ON / M5S 1A4 // 416 978 3106

Scopes was found guilty on a technicality. William Jennings Bryan, attorney for the 
prosecution, died.  Everybody was too exhausted or too bored to carry it further.
The whole thing had been a circus. The law was kept on the books and ignored until 
it was finally taken off the books decades later.  The case is mostly used as
a bloody shirt by the ACLU to remind us how they are protecting our Fundamental
Liberties and please send money.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: riaedwards@halls1.cc.monash.edu.au (AUDREY EDWARDS)
Subject: Re: Just a quick question
Organization: Halls of Residence, Monash University 
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 01:27:58 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.100135.12987@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
>Subject: Re: Just a quick question
>Date: 9 Nov 92 10:01:35 GMT

>From: riaedwards@halls1.cc.monash.edu.au (AUDREY EDWARDS)
>>One more thing...I cannot see how your marital status affects your liability
>>for poll tax.

>You are legally liable to pay your wife or husband's poll tax.
>If they don't pay it you can be taken to court and made to pay
>it for them. This does not apply to someone with whom you are
>sharing a house but not living as husband and wife. Thus the
>trendy form of marriage proposal "would you like to become
>liable for my poll tax?". There was widespread discussion on
>this mater when the poll tax legislation was first put through.
>I am surprised you are unaware of it.

>Matthew Huntbach

Being unmarried, and thus not affecting me, means that fact probably didn't 
register. Thanks for the clarification....I'll remember to check a suitor's 
credit history before giving a response! (-:

Audrey.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15390 alt.folklore.urban:27730
From: linden@positive.Eng.Sun.COM (Trelford Pinkerton)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Britain doesn't have a Constitution (Re: An astonishing Guy)
Date: 8 Nov 1992 19:42:54 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: positive

Audrey:
> Just because the Americans have one method of creating a constitutional 
> framework, does not mean that any other method (by definition) is not 
> capable of achieving the same results. 

True.

> We do have a constitution, it's just in a different form. 

If that different form does not comprise a framework within which all
laws are passed, and with which all laws must agree, then it is not a
constitution in the American sense, merely a set of bureaucratic
procedures.

It will be straightforward to tell the difference: please provide a list
of recent British laws which have been set aside by the courts as being
"unconstitutional".   Perhaps your year of legal study covered this?

If there aren't any, then the British constitution isn't worth the paper
that it isn't written on.


          Trelford "yes, Phil really is a nice guy, and he loaned
                    me a book on the Constitution too"  Pinkerton.
--
   Inventor of the Lambada-Calculus.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Subject: Re: Just a quick question
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 08:49:39 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.191649.10040@vax.oxford.ac.uk> wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <A.Grant.18.721245531@ucs.cam.ac.uk>, A.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:

>> It stands for "For unnatural carnal knowledge". Like TDA and GBH.

>Actually that would be an anacronym if it were the case, which it isn't. 
			   ^^^^^^^^^
Is this a new portmanteau word?  "Anachronistic acronym"?
--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk
From: martin.baines@uk.sun.com (Martin Baines - Sun UK - SE Manager Cambridge)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: The Maastricht vote (was Re: Dog in Ho
Date: 12 Nov 1992 12:54:28 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Ltd
Distribution: world
Reply-To: martin.baines@uk.sun.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: bottomdog.uk.sun.com

In article 14650@dcs.qmw.ac.uk, mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>From: martin.baines@uk.sun.com (Martin Baines - Sun UK - SE Manager Cambridge)
>>It would have been much easier to just not bother with
>>a vote. The reason for whipping the MPs was that they
>>were all elected on a very clear election manifesto
>>commitment to Maastricht (it was on the first page)
>>and has all committed to the manifesto before the election.
>
>A number of the rebels actually mentioned their opposition to
>Maastricht in their election addresses. Preumably one can
>assume that what's in the manifesto is the default, but a
>candidate's election address overrides it.

A fair point: I have no problem with those MPs who voted
as they said they would before the election.

Actually I believe that Europe is the issue that shows up
the fault lines in our party political system more than
any other. It is crazy that an issue as controversial as
this should not be presented to the electorate in a sane
manner: at the last election in most constituancies there
was a choice from 3 pro-Maastricht candidates and (possibly)
some other loonies. This is one of the main reasons I favour
STV as a voting system: it would have been perfectly possible
for all the parties then to have multiple candiates, some
of whom were pro and some anti. But as this didn't happen
I think the next best thing would be a referendum. At the 
very least there should be a (completely) free vote of
MPs by *all* the parties. Oh well, I can dream...

BTW I am a strong support of Maastricht, but knowing the
inherent Europhobia of the British I suspect it may not
pass and I *still* support a referendum. I guess that's
why I am not in party politics.

Martin

---
"You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment"

Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager,
Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK
Phone: +44 223 420421                 Fax: +44 223 420257
JANET:     Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun    Other UK:  Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk
Internet:  Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com
X.400:     g=martin s=baines prmd=sunir admd=mci c=us

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth)
Subject: Re: Britain doesn't have a Constitution (Re: An astonishing Guy)
Organization: Software Engineering Institute
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:04:42 GMT

In article <lfqrduINNa4m@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> linden@positive.Eng.Sun.COM (Trelford Pinkerton) writes:

>It will be straightforward to tell the difference: please provide a list
>of recent British laws which have been set aside by the courts as being
>"unconstitutional".   Perhaps your year of legal study covered this?

What a bizarre notion!  The idea that the legislature is allowed to
enact unconstitutional laws, which must then be laboriously and
expensively challenged in the courts.  Meanwhile, millions of people
have their rights systematically violated for as many years as it
takes these slow mills to grind.

What sane person would craft such an absurdity?  Far better to ensure
that unconstitutional laws do not get enacted at all; or, if enacted,
do not get enforced.  The English constuitution attempts the former;
the Roman attempted the latter.  Both, of course, sometimes fail, but
probably no more often than the US system; and when they work they do
not work by first inflicting injury, and then trying to undo it.


Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Subject: Re: Private Uni's
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 09:15:26 GMT

In article <graikund.721012412@jupiter.newcastle.edu.au> graikund@jupiter.newcastle.edu.au (Gitesh Raikundalia) writes:
>Dear British Netters
>	
>	I was hoping to ask if anybody out there can give me an "order of
>reputation" of private universities (if any) in England. How well-accepted
>are they compared to the public uni's, like Oxford, Cambridge, etc.? Do
>the public universities take postgraduate/research students via personal
>funding?

There's only one private university in the UK, the University of
Buckingham.  It has almost no reputation to speak of; I would imagine
that most people are unaware of its existence.  I've never come across
anyone who's worked or studied there.

--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk