HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: majafri@cco.caltech.edu (Mansoor  A. Jafri)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Hijacking of democracy Re: S.R.I.A.
Date: 16 Nov 1992 04:47:29 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu


In article <1992Nov15.210801.1@uwovax.uwo.ca> 3040_3744@uwovax.uwo.ca writes:
>In article <1e68ruINNd0u@gap.caltech.edu>, majafri@cco.caltech.edu (Mansoor  A. Jafri) writes:
>> In article <1992Nov14.183304.1@uwovax.uwo.ca> 3040_3744@uwovax.uwo.ca writes:
>>>Hijacking of democratic process by Mr. Mansoor Jaffrey
>>>
MAJ>>I am very much appalled by the act of Mr. Mansoor Jaffrey who attempted to 
MAJ>> 	Before you go on, lets look at the sequence of events.
MAJ>> 	1. Rana submits a RFD to news.announce.newgroups. 
MAJ>> 	2. Rana's RFD is approved by David Lawrence and posted.
MAJ>> 	3. Rana posts a CFV on news.groups (without submitting to n.a.newgrps)
MAJ>> 	4. Rana's above CFV is termed invalid, Rana apologizes.
MAJ>> 	5. News.groups readers object to Rana as being a vote-taker as well
MAJ>> 	   as the proposed moderator.
MAJ>> 	6. Like anyone else could, I volunteered to take vote and sent 
MAJ>> 	   a CFV to news.announce.newgroups.


>Who have asked you to volunteer for taking votes? Don't distort facts. Instead

	Please spare us the emotional B.S. Are you ticked off because 
	some neutral person came in as a vote taker ? 
	Again note, I am neither oppoenent nor proponent while you may
	rather have some proponent as a vote taker ?

	Btw, I have as much right to post a RFD or CFV as any one on 
	the usenet, I volunteered myself like anyone else can. Can you
	comprehend that ?

	Of course you will like to create confusion and cry foul no matter
	what. Can you hold off to your emotional horses till we hear from
	David Lawrence why he cancelled a legitimate CFV sent to him by me
	and approved by him ?

	Study the chronological order of events before you once again go on
	smearing allegations.


MAJ>> 	7. David Lawrence approved it and posted it on news.announce.newgroups
MAJ>> 	   and all related forums.
MAJ>>         8. David Lawrence (without informing me & on basis of Rana's personal
MAJ>>            note to him) cancells my CFV and posts Rana's instead.
MAJ>> 	9. Raja reposts my CFV on other related groups.
>
>I am sure that Raja is the other culprit beside you and he is fully involve in
>this shameful act.

	Yeah sure and so is the rest of the world, quit being paranoid.


MAJ>> 	So there, you have it. If anyone is to be blamed for confusion it 
MAJ>> 	is David Lawrence. If anyone needs to apologize it is YOU who went
MAJ>> 	on smearing allegations on me without first finding out what is going
MAJ>> 	on. Be careful next time. 
>
>>>Hameed Mirza
>> 
>> M.A.J
>
>Hameed Mirza

MAJ
From: rana@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (Nabeel Ahmad Rana)
Subject: Re: The Whole S.R.I.A CFV Mess....
Keywords: SRIA-CFV, Fiasco
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 04:25:35 GMT

jodar@girtab.usc.edu (Nicholas Jodar) writes:

>My understanding (which seems to have no factual basis) was that
>the person who submitted the RFD was the same one who submitted
>the CFV.  I figured a neutral person was required to oversee the
>whole thing.  If this is not the case, then I ask, 'Why not?'  

>I ask because, if my memory is correct, (and it may not be), the 
>person counting the votes for the SRIA-CFV has established a clear 
>opinion regarding the formation of the new group through postings 
>on the net.  This brings up the question of how was he selected 
>for the job.


Please look at the history of USENET! Traditionally the person who
has been issuing the RFD has been taking Votes. It is very difficult
to find someone who is really impartial. Secondly there is no way
one can really rig or cheat with the votes, since proof of all votes
received have to be made accessable to anybody.


Sincerely;


-- 
Nabeel A. Rana
rana@rintintin.colorado.edu
LOVE FOR ALL : HATRED FOR NONE.
________________________________________________________________
Xref: sparky news.groups:21992 soc.culture.indian:37165 soc.culture.pakistan:16745 soc.culture.bangladesh:5955
From: gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu (Gopal Agrawal)
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: CFV: soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya moderated
Date: 16 Nov 92 06:43:10 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University

>In article <1e4bdfINNhai@CURIE.SYSTEMSY.CS.YALE.EDU> ahmed-shakil@cs.yale.edu (Shakil Waiz Ahmed) went on about...
>>
>>But ultimately, the majority vote is implemented.  Since the majority
>>of Muslims do not wish to be associated with Ahmadis, there is no
>>reason to force that association.  Nobody is denying the Ahmadis the
>>right to practice their religion.  But by adopting the name "Islam"
>>they are somehow associating with other Muslims.  Since Muslims far
>>outnumber Ahmadis, it follows that the Ahmadis should reconsider the
>>semantics.
>

So, at some time in the future (a century or two perhaps), IF the Ahmadis 
outbreed the majority muslims now, then it stands to reason that you would 
no longer be a muslim if they did not wish to consider you a muslim !! 
Whatever happened to "Islam is between man and Allah (and no one in between)".

regards,
--   
   ______ ______ ______ ______ __  |\/\/\/|
    ____/  __  /  __  /  __  /  /  |  \  /|  LIFE's COMPLEX - IT HAS
   / __   /   /  /   /  /   /  /   | (o)(o)  REAL & IMAGINARY PARTS.
  /   /  /   /   ___/  __  /  /    C      _) 
_____/ _____/ __/   __/ __/ ______/ | \___|  
E-mail - gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu       |   /   All Std. Disclaimers apply.
From: rogers@isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.unicycles
Date: 18 Nov 92 03:09:57 GMT
Reply-To: rogers@blips.isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Organization: USC-Information Sciences Institute

In article <22904@venera.isi.edu> rogers@blips.isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers) writes:
>		    * The Unicycle Society of America

	I've been asked to correct myself.  The society is properly
named, "The Unicycling Society Of America, Inc."

					Craig Milo Rogers
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: hachiman@stein.u.washington.edu (matt)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.arts.fantasy
Date: 18 Nov 92 04:00:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov18.040052.20420
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <n2kq50q@lynx.unm.edu> quirk@pioneer.unm.edu (Gym Z. Quirk) writes:
>
>A poorly-thought-out proposal by any name...
>
>The point is that the distinction between Science Fiction and Fantasy
>cannot be easily defined, and therefore, given the voiciferous and
>anal-retentive nature of some readers, will generate considerable
>flamage.  Furthermore, it will be *repetative* flamage as new people
>come enter the net, read the group and demmand that XYZ book not be
>discussed here since it's obvious even an imbecille that it doesn't
>fall under (their concept) of Fantasy vs. Science Fiction.

It seems that there are three groups of books: 'obviously science fiction',
'obviously fantasy', and 'somewhere inbetween'.  One question is whether
the 'obvious fantasy' is something we can define clearly enough to attach
a name to.  Instead of forming 'rec.arts.fantasy', what if the name were
'rec.arts.sf.traditional.fantasy' or something like that to make it more
apparent what kind of books should be discussed.  'Rec.arts.sf.psuedo.
medieval.with.magic'?  

Can we come up with a definition, not of "fantasy", but of that group of fantasy
that kind of clumps around the Tolkein-Eddison-Howard-Eddings kind of stuff?  
The in between kind of stuff can just remain in rec.arts.sf.

Comments?  I realize that some people think that the RFD was premature, but
since we're discussing it we might as well try to discuss it constructively
(not to imply that anyone hasn't been:) ).

 _______________________________
|  Matthew B. Downer       	|
|  hachiman@u.washington.edu	|
|  				|
|  Ore no denwa bango wa 911 da.|
|_______________________________|
From: majafri@cco.caltech.edu (Mansoor  A. Jafri)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Hijacking of democracy Re: S.R.I.A.
Date: 15 Nov 92 19:43:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: gap.1e698lINNdhk
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

In article <101975@bu.edu> khalid@bu-bio.bu.edu (Rasheed A. Khalid) writes:
>I am apalled to read about what quite vividly appears to be
>a cheap conspiracy staged by non-Ahmadi Muslims on the net
>against Ahmadi Muslims.  An unauthorised person, Mr. Jaffery,
>posted the Call For Votes (CFV) for the proposed newsgroup
>soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya (moderated) even though he was
>never appointed to do so.  The mainstream Muslims (made up

	I don't know why are so paranoid but on usenet no one
	is 'authorized' to post RFDs & CFVs. Anyone can submit
	it, so did Rana, to news.announce.newgroups. It is up
	to the moderator of news.announce.newgroups to make it
	'official.' This time the moderator screwed up and 
	hence the confusion. If you going to try to create even
	further confusion over it, be my guest. The people who
	need to discuss the issue is David Lawrence, Mr. Rana
	& I. Please be patient and lets see how we try to fix 
	the screwup. If you have suggestions, by all means send
	them to us. 


>people in the world.  But what is interestingly shameful is
>that a moderator of soc.religion.islam who goes by the name
>of Basalat Ali Raja seemed to have played a role in this --
>he authorised the article on newsgroup soc.religion.islam,

	Raja was requested by David Lawrence to authorize the CFV.
	Care to ask David rather than blaming someone else ?

>Rasheed, Boston, U.S.A.
>
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: Give up, Dave, you've lost!
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 13:45:22 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom):
>1. Avoid bundling multiple unrelated votes onto a single ballot.
>   [...] the only bundling which should be allowed is either:
>   (a) different ways of splitting a single newsgroup
>   (b) different ways of renaming a single newsgroup
>   (c) uniform renaming of an entire hierarchy -- e.g. x.y.* to x.* or x.y.z.*

Simple practicality argues against such a proposal, even with the
restrictions you name.  One problem reorg shouldn't cause anyone to
paint all of them with the same brush.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
                 just another elitist Usenet administrator
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 00:32:01 GMT

In article <1dsba6INNq1b@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU> randall-joshua@yale.edu (Joshua Randall) writes:

   Oh, by the way, I'm very secure and no one can say anything to make me
   feel bad, so don't even bother.

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.  Now
go away or I shall taunt you a second time.

:)

-- 
Ed McGuire                   1603 LBJ Freeway, Suite 780
Systems Administrator/       Dallas, Texas 75234
 Member of Technical Staff   214/620-2100, FAX 214/484-8110
Intellection, Inc.           <ed@intellection.com>
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: pmmuggli@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu  (pauline muggli)
Subject: Re: challenge to result:rec.arts.urdu.poems 303:145
Originator: mdtll@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 21:54:58 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, Univ. of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA


  lugowski@ils.nwu.edu (Marek Lugowski) writes:
 
>At the very instant the result of voting was made public, I requested from
>you the complete record of votes, as you publically said it was available
>for inspection.  We are now at the end of the 5 day waiting period and I
>feel that you are stalling, making it difficult to verify your vote-taking.
 [ some deleted ]
 
>Many people who voted in your estimation "yes" actually cast ambiguous
>votes.  One person is even listed twice in this list of votes you sent
>me.  One person is wishing you well and not voting.  In some other
>cases the headers indicate that you solicited votes from individual
>users ("IN-REPLY-TO") and one even quoted your solicitation in its
>entirety while supplying the vote.  Yes, even though on the surface
>you solicited votes noncommitally, I believe you did approach people
>selectively who you KNEW were likely to vote "yes": they all have
>Indian names.
 
>I am going to challenge the vote for rec.arts.poems.urdu as both procedurally
>flawed on account of your solicitation and because the 3 calls for votes
>were issued to non-identical newsgroups (violates Guidelines), as well as
>on account of *far more than five* invalid votes.
 
the thing about this vote that bothered me was the lack of a
"people who voted" list when the second and third CFVs were
posted.  i had to wait until the results were posted to find out
if my vote had been accepted.

i voted no.  my disagreement was based on group name.  it should
be somewhere else if you want an urdu language/culture/talk/literature
group.  i see the need for such a group just not as a poems
group.  putting it under r.a.poems is far too restrictive for
what the group will be.

a final thought.  if some of what marek contends is true, and i would
like to see proof posted on news.groups.  the new group control
message *should* be held up until the actual votes are examined.  the
reason i say this is because of the 5 vote margin that put the group
over the 2/3 ratio.

if marek (since he seems to want to examine the votes) cannot prove his
allegations, send the newgroup control message.

pauline
From: horde@reed.edu (Mr. Heiji Horde)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Date: 16 Nov 92 20:37:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Nov16.203747.9516
Organization: Twisted Genius Rehabilitation Center, a Division of MHE

In article <1992Nov16.184332.21387@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> adc@tardis.msu.edu:
>> I for one wouldn't mind an UNmoderated rec.games.netrek.programmer.  Just
>> one, no moderation.
>The reason I would like to see it moderated is so that it the group would
>stick to the topics at hand.  A moderator also goes a long way in culling
>FAQs that are frequently posted by new readers.

But I thought you were going to put the FAQs in the .announce group. Sorry,
  but if there is going to be a .programmer group, it had better damn well
  be unmoderated.
Alan, we are so sorry that there are people out there who are human and
  don't always stay on topic. My opinion...DEAL WITH IT! If you don't want
  to deal with people going off the topic, why didn't you make the ENTIRE
  rec.arts.netrek* heirarchy moderated???

>Ummm, fascist-sounding?

Yes, "fascist-sounding". Might have been less so if you hadn't listed
  yourself as moderator for those two groups. *yawn* But we've beaten
  that to death...

	-Heiji

-- 
==============================================================================
  Mr. Heiji Horde   (Unix Systems Programmer, Reed College)   horde@reed.edu
     All insane acts are done in affiliation with Madd Hacker Enterprises
        Chup a chup, chup times into chup chups each 1/chup of a chup.
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Dave Hayes may be right (was Re: To keep the r.m.s rename...)
Date: 20 Nov 92 21:11:19 GMT
Followup-To: rec.music.makers.synth,news.groups,rec.music.synth
Organization: negligable

In article <1992Nov19.090220.14539@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>Ok...Touche...Ow, stop. I guess I want people to stop treating newbies like
>they're dirt and people to stop renaming things anal retentively. Those
>aren't exactly objective criteria, I know...and hardly enforcable. But
>a good reworking of the "usenet documentation" and "guidelines" may be
>a good thing to start with. 

Attempting to rewrite anything without objective criteria would seem
to me to be an excercise in futility....

So you don't you say something that can stand as objective criteria?

It's a hell of a lot harder than just bitching about the way things
are, isn't it?

		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Badges?  I don' got to show you no stinkin' badges!"

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: qvortrup@inf.ethz.ch (Michael Qvortrup)
Subject: Re: rec.arts.fantasy
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 13:30:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.040052.20420@u.washington.edu> hachiman@stein.u.washington.edu (matt) writes:
>Can we come up with a definition, not of "fantasy", but of that group of
>fantasy that kind of clumps around the Tolkein-Eddison-Howard-Eddings kind
>of stuff?  

I doubt it. This problem was discussed ad nauseam last year during the
grand flame fest - eh, I mean reorganisation. Nobody, I mean nobody, could
bring a definition on which more than five people could agree. As far as
I remember the above scheme was also suggested. It still wont work. Case
in point: you stuck Eddings in together with Tolkien. I'd challenge you 
to find 20 readers of/contributors to r.a.sf.written, who would not only
accept it, but also consider it a good idea.

>The in between kind of stuff can just remain in rec.arts.sf.

And who precides over the judging panel? The one which will have to
be set up to define what the "in between stuff" really is.

>Comments?  I realize that some people think that the RFD was premature, but
>since we're discussing it we might as well try to discuss it constructively
>(not to imply that anyone hasn't been:) ).

Never mind the prematureness of the RFD, the idea is doomed to die anyway.
Hopefully we can avoid the monthlong discussion/flame fest this time.

Greetings,
--Mike

-- 
#include <std-disclm.h>--"... and there is a small flaw in my character."---
Real Life: Michael Christian Heide Qvortrup      A Dane         ETH, Zuerich
e-mail   : qvortrup@inf.ethz.ch                  abroad         Switzerland
Institut fuer wissenschaftliches Rechnen  /  Inst. of Scientific Computation
From: majafri@cco.caltech.edu (Mansoor  A. Jafri)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: CFV Ahmadiyya
Date: 15 Nov 1992 19:50:40 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

In article <1992Nov15.174910.25393@bernina.ethz.ch> nadeem@igpho (Nadeem Malik) writes:
>I have just seen a post by Jaffrey on soc.culture.pakistan that he intends to continue
>collecting votes and that he has collected 200 so far!
>
>Something has to be done to stop this indecent activity!

	Malik, my understanding is that anyone can post CFV. So I did. Let
	me clarify that it was not on the prompting of anyone as you alleg.
	
	The votes are coming in, I have no control over it. I wasn't even 
	informed that a CFV by me is not acceptable rather it was approved
	and POSTED by DAVID LAWRENCE.

	Now, would you quit twisting things around?

	M.A.J.

>
>Nadeem Malik
>nadeem@p.igp.ethz.ch


Newsgroups: news.groups
From: doug@cc.ysu.edu (Doug Sewell)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.lang.basic
Organization: Bush in 92 ? NOT!
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 03:51:08 GMT

randall-joshua@yale.edu (Joshua Randall) writes:
: 
: If this group (comp.lang.basic) is for "*all* implementations of ...
: BASIC ... *including* ... MS-Windows" (emphasis added), then why the
: proposal for a separate group for Visual Basic?
: 

Visual Basic is significantly more (IMHO, anyway) than "just a basic
compiler/interpreter", in that it includes an interface builder and
interactive environment, and many event-handling features not common
to "the rest of the BASICs".

Further, Visual Basic is rarely discussed in alt.lang.basic, it sits
in with the Windows newsgroups.  I expect that this would probably
continue, or that the "traditional BASIC" and the VB folk will both
clamor for separate newsgroups.  This is my rationale for proposing
two separate groups.

My original intent was to only propose the VB group, but I figure if
I have to run one vote, I might as well run both.  The two different
groups each have to stand or fall on their own merit, but I'd hate
to see a VB group fail because "it should just be lumped with the
other BASICs".
--
Doug Sewell, Tech Support, Computer Center, Youngstown State University
doug@cc.ysu.edu	   doug@ysub.bitnet	<internet>!cc.ysu.edu!doug

cat core | uuencode bunny.dropping | mail jp@tygra.michigan.com
From: tom@soda.berkeley.edu (Tom Holub)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Date: 18 Nov 1992 04:42:09 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

In article <Bxv60G.B4q.2@cs.cmu.edu> hill@norman.vi.ri.cmu.edu writes:
)
)Well...i'm not too concerned with policy.  Do you really think this  
)discussion is better suited to be here?  Are the rules that important?   
)Are exceptions not made?  I have a copy of the quidelines.  I'm not for  
)offending the gods at uunet, but it is a pretty bad idea to address issues  
)about the future of rec.games.netrek ANYWHERE other than rec.games.netrek.

If anyone wants a group to be created, he MUST follow the guidelines;
if discussion on the rec.games.netrek split goes on only in
rec.games.netrek, many of the people who read news.groups will vote
against any proposed split (or new group, for that matter) on
principle.  Note that the people who read news.groups are the 
system administrators who have to add the group, as well, and many
of them will not honor newgroup requests if the group did not
follow the written procedures.

Plus, I see no reason why rec.games.netrek deserves an exception to the
policy.
 -Tom
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.usenet.culture
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Usenet Culture (Was: Re: CFV? What's a CFV??)
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 20:16:06 GMT

jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap) writes:
>others seem to be more in the business of destruction and
>demoralization of the volunteers who have built the net to be what it
>currently is.  Not that the `creators' require obeisance and
>sacrifice, just some respect (or lack of disdain) for their efforts in

Respect can mean consideration, esteem, or both. Respect is something
given freely, and usually given both ways. When someone or some entity
doesn't respect you, respecting it is quite difficult and beyond the
sensibilities of most human beings.

If news.groups is the "representative group" of the creators and maintainers,
then please explain to me why so much disrespect is shown novices and
people trying to fix things?
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Be wary of strong drink.  It can make you shoot at tax collectors and miss
Newsgroups: news.groups