HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lal@cs.arizona.edu (The Morning Sun)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.solid-state.electronics
Summary: support sci.solid-state.electronics
Date: 13 Nov 92 20:49:23 GMT

In article <BxnGI5.FD5@uunet.uu.net>, sehari@iastate.edu (Babak Sehari) writes:
> In observation of the guidelines for usenet group creation a request for
> discussion on creation of sci.solid-state.electronics is being
> cross posted to sci.electronics, sci.physics, and news.announce.newsgroups.
> The name of this group is still open for discussion. Each field of this 
> new proposed newsgroup name should be less than 15 characters long, a field 
> is the combinations of words between two ".". Also, there should be no bogus 
> character such as "&" in the field.

	[stuff deleted]

>                      With highest regards,
>                           Babak   Sehari.

I heartily support the creation of this new newsgroup.
How about - "sci.microelectonics" ?
or "sci.electronics.micro" ?

A related issue:

What are the top graduate schools for VLSI design, and digital microelectronics?
I am interested in graduate studies (M.S.) in the above field and am also
interested in semiconductor device physics, quantum effect devices, and
perhaps a joint M.S./MBA program.

Please E-mail me any relevant information.

Thanks

A. Lal
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.frp.campaign
Date: 13 Nov 92 19:24:45 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups,rec.games.frp.misc
Organization: negligable

In article <BxHnx8.4FJ@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca writes:
>In article <GOLDM.92Nov9114756@sage4a.rpi.edu> goldm@rpi.edu (Mitchell E. Gold) writes:
>>[Newsgroups line edited to get rid of unnecessary cross-posting]
>>
>>I repeat my objection to this based on two things:
>>1) The traffic on rec.games.frp.archives, the charter of which includes 3/4 of
>>  what you propose to cut off, isn't very much (it even somehow escaped being
>>  tallied this month on arbitron statistics), and
>>2) Discussion of how to play or run frp games already belongs in .misc or .dnd.
>
>I believe that a newsgroup devoted to campaigns will not only contain
>those messages which already exist in other newsgroups that are related to
>the subject.  The Campaign newsgroup will foster new discussions, promote
>new interest in campaigning, and serve as the starting ground for many
>(I hope) fine net-based story-campaigns that will be enjoyable reading
>for all.

"I believe" is not enough.  One of the prime requisites for newsgroup
splitting (which is actually what you are proposing, splitting .misc
into .misc and .campaign, because .misc is where campaign discussions
currently would be) is demonstrating that enough traffic currently
exists on the subject to justify a new group.  This is why .dnd exists,
it was the only game generating enough game-specific traffic to justify 
a separate group.  Go to rfp.misc.  Talk about campaigns for a while.
show that there is enough continuing traffic on this one issue for a 
significant period of time to justify a new group.  Theories and personal
beliefs that "there will be enough traffic" are NOT enough to justify
a split.

		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston)
Subject: Re: Newsgroup Moderator.
Reply-To: gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston)
Organization: SCI Systems, Inc., Huntsville, Al.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 15:47:12 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.194640.4375@cbfsb.cb.att.com> mxl@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (marc.a.levy) writes:
>How would someone go about getting a new moderator for a news
>group?

Find a naieve sucker with a good net connection and lots of time on
his/her hands.

:-)

Generally, if you're trying to replace a moderator, it depends on whether
the old moderator is inactive, or annoying most of the groups' readers.

In the first case, simply notify the person posting the monthly List of
Moderators, and persuade them to make the change. It may take a month or
so for the change to propogate.

In the second case, it can be nearly impossible if an existing moderator
does not wish to step down. A competing moderator could set up operations,
but that would most likely cause a cancel war and lots of other havoc.



-- 
Gary Heston    SCI Systems, Inc.  gary@sci34hub.sci.com   site admin
The Chairman of the Board and the CFO speak for SCI. I'm neither.
"Data sheet: HSN-3000 Nuclear Event Detector. The [NED] senses the gamma
radiation pulse [from a] nuclear weapon." As if we wouldn't notice...
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: A question, a comment
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff & Nonsense Division
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 14:35:13 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.052045.3880@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:

>irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith) writes:
>
>>Question: Who, specifically, does the renaming of rec.music.synth harm, and
>>how? I'm looking for specifics about this particular renaming, not general
>>comments about "disempowerment". 
>
>It harmed the users of the group by causing people to drop out. 

Sounds to me like that was more a result of this flame war.  By my
reckoning, that's your fault.

>>Will sites drop the group because of the name change? 
>
>Sites will have done so when the gateway to SYNTH-L drops.

Dave, you know and I know that's a lie.  Bob Sloane has already
volunteered to pick up the SYNTH-L gateway to rec.music.makers.synth.

>>Various people have suggested various dire outcomes, and been refuted in
>>various ways; I'd like to see someone (Dave Hayes?) post a reasonably
>>concise summary of WHY this renaming was a bad thing.
>
>To answer that I'll ask everyone why this renaming was a good thing?
>The group has been in operation for years...why change it now?

That point has already been addressed, Dave, but in deference to you:
groups focusing on the making of music for various instruments or
genres have come into being, scattered all over the net, since no one
anticipated the need for a hierarchy for them all.  Rich K. saw the
pattern, and proposed a reorganization.  At least one person has come
forward to say that they find the new structure much easier to
navigate than the assorted guitar and synth groups that existed
before.

>Concise results of the change:
>
>1) Less membership.

By two?

>2) Less distribution.

By one site, apparently.  That's your responsibility, and no one
else's.

>3) A flamewar.

Seems to me you brought that one up, too.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.games.frp.misc
From: orville%weyrich@uunet.uu.net (Orville R. Weyrich)
Subject: Re: 386 ADVICE REQUIRED
Reply-To: orville@weyrich.UUCP (Orville R. Weyrich)
Organization: Weyrich Computer Consulting
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 08:18:52 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.020221.796@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu> neilfp@astro.ocis.temple.edu (Neil F. Palumbo) writes:
>According to latest issue of PC magazine, NOW is the time to buy. They

Doubtless true, just considering RAM prices. It may already be too late.

>			4 meg of ram (can't put 2 in a DX)

NOT ALWAYS TRUE -- I have a Micronics motherboard (DX-16) that has 2 MB on the
daughter-board (additional daughter-boards could add more RAM). Now, it may be
true that most new motherboards take SIMMS in multiples of 4, but it is not
inherrent in the DX cpu.




orville

--------------------------------------   **************************************
Orville R. Weyrich, Jr.                        Weyrich Computer Consulting
Certified Data Processor                     POB 5782, Scottsdale, AZ 85261
Certified Systems Professional                   Voice: (602) 391-0821
Certified Computer Programmer            Internet: orville%weyrich@uunet.uu.net
--------------------------------------   **************************************
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Guidelines discussion: RFD
Keywords: RFD, Guidelines
Date: 8 Nov 92 00:48:56 GMT
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography

In article <568@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>Is a msg w/ the subject line "RFD: ...." a sufficiently clear means
>of notifying a group about a change that may affect them?  

Yes.

>The initials
>RFD, CFV etc are clear to the news admins in new.groups who have read
>the guidelines and are watching for such things.  But using INITIALS
>to try and get the point across to a bunch of musicians that got on
>the net to talk about synthesizers may not be clear.

About 10 seconds of reading the first RFD one comes accross will inform
one of the meaning of RFD: "This is a Request for Discussion...".  The
only ones who won't know what RFD means are those who don't care what
RFD means.

>Should the messages that are posted to the affected groups have
>more detailed, unobfuscated "Subject:" lines?  e.g. (1/2 :) ) :
>
>	> Subject: Your news group may be renamed!!! Speak up NOW!

And then we have to argue about the sites that truncate subject lines
and just why should someone who hasn't posted read something that says
"Subject: Your news gro"?
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: "BAD" music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 11:28:53 GMT

rorschak@daimi.aau.dk (Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
>>I can't imagine a valid reason for a "no" response to this suggestion.
> Subject: CFV: Making of rec.music.makers.guitar, rec.music.makers.bass, rec.music.makers.guitar.tablature, rec.music.makers.percussion and renaming rec.music.synth to rec.music.makers.synth.

How about this:

Subject: CALL FOR VOTES which involves or renames THIS group.
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

The difference between a moral man and a man of honour is that the latter 
regrets a discreditable act, even when it has worked and he has not been caught.
From: rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.sport.soccer.referees
Date: 13 Nov 1992 16:48:01 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx
NNTP-Posting-Host: crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu

In article <BxnGHx.FBF@uunet.uu.net>, cjones@troi.dbaccess.com (Carl Jones) writes:
> This is a request for the creation of a new news group.
> The proposed name would be: rec.sport.soccer.referees
> The group should not need to be moderated (rec.sport.soccer is not).
> Its charter is to provide a forum for the discussion of
> 	1. new rules
> 	2. rule changes
> 	3. IBD's and interpretations
> 	4. actual field situations and how they might be handled
> 	5. exchange of information on training classes, instructional
> 	   material, organizational meetings, etc.
> 	6. other topics surely to be suggested by others

Why can't this be handled within the existing rec.sport.soccer newsgroup. Is
there sufficient traffic on these topics in the existing group that it is
necessary to have a separate group on officiating. None of the other sports
groups have found it necessary. Please provide some traffic figures to justify
the requirement for a split of the group. 







-- 
Richard H. Miller                 Email: rick@bcm.tmc.edu
Asst. Dir. for Technical Support  Voice: (713)798-3532
Baylor College of Medicine        US Mail: One Baylor Plaza, 302H
                                           Houston, Texas 77030
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca ()
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.frp.campaign
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:09:45 GMT

In article <564@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>In article <Bx7nG3.MwK@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> cbnorman@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu writes:
>>Yes.  A moderator's job is to get rid of off topic messages.  A campaign move
>>which is not (quoting myself here) "in a ledgible, readible, enjoyable format
>>for all" is an off-topic message.
>
>So now some people's moves will be dumped because they are ill-written?

As I stated later on in this message (but you chose not to quote that part), there will be no messages rejected because of mispelling, bad grammer, etc.  
Messages will only be rejected if they chose to ignore the basic guidelines,
namely that the moves be written in sentence form and be without references
to rules.  For example, here's a 'pretend' expert from a move that would
be rejected.

   Bloodwart: swings his longsword at the Treant.  I roll a 17 for his to hit
              roll, so he hits.  Damage rollis 4 on d8 so total damage is
              4+2(strength bonus)+3(magic bonus).  The Treant has 31hp left.
   Galdwin:   casts magic missile.  All missiles hit for a total of 18hp
              of damage.
   Treant:    Hits Lork for 16hp of damage.  Lork looses "Rary's Mnemonic
              Enhancer", the spell he was attempting to cast this round.

The move is not written as a story, in sentence form, it is a step by step
account of actions.  The numberous AD&D rules references also make it
unpostable in .campaign.

>This seems to put those players at a disavantage if they cannot attack
>the treant just because they can't type...  Or would their move be
>accepted but just not posted?  That might make the campaign hard to
>follow:

Player moves are sent in NetMail.  For more details see the revised proposal.

>
>>Very well.  Everyone seems to be throwing this whole "legible, readible,
>>enjoyable format for all" way out of proportion.  I'll change the charter,
>>now the only restriction on GM posts is that they be designed in such a way
>>that they do not require knowledge of game rules to understand, and are written
>>in sentence form as a story.  Fare enough?

Oops, I retract my previous flame that you did not quote this part of my message
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored20663
Date: 6 Nov 1992 20:38:18 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1deivsINNq87@agate.berkeley.edu> shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff) writes:
>Just as a hypothetical, suppose a talk.bizarre crowd (for instance) posted a
>RFD/CFV with a highly misleading subject, such as "CFV: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
>reorganization" to a bunch of newsgroups.

Fallacy 1: It would have to be an RFD first, and news.announce.newsgroups
would have to be included in the list.

>Also suppose that buried in an
>extremely long list of topics was a vote to make these newsgroups into
>subgroups of comp.protocols.tcp-ip.

Which "these newsgroups"? talk.bizarre and news.groups (since that's where
your original message was posted)?

Fallacy 2: Dave Lawrence, the moderator of news.announce.newgroups - and, as
such, the guy who would actually post the message to the net - would catch
this and send it back to the original sender with a strong suggestion that the
subject reflect the actual contents. (Before you say the r.m.m reorg didn't:
it did, as its main thrust was reorganization of rec.music.makers.)

>Also suppose that most people ignored the
>c.p.tcp-ip reorg except for the people in talk.bizarre, who were in on the
>joke, and thus the vote passed.

Fallacy 3: Most groups have folks who are more involved in the process of
Usenet groups than the folks in rec.music.synth evidently were, news.groups
and talk.bizarre foremost among them. (Bizarrites have perpetrated some of the
most egregious misnamings ever seen on Usenet, sci.aquaria formost among
them.)

>By the arguments I'm seeing in news.groups,
>it seems like Usenet would then be forced to become a subgroup of c.p.tcp-ip,
>and nobody could do anything about it.  Is this true?

Assuming that your chain of events above were true, then yes, we'd be stuck
with it. However, every step in your case has a flaw.

-- 
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.
     We survived Jimmy Carter; we'll (probably) survive Bill Clinton.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: tanaka@til.til.com (Yokichi Tanaka)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.ai.fuzzy
Organization: Togai InfraLogic, Inc.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 22:52:42 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.181819.27565@til.til.com>, erik@maui.til.com (Erik Horstkotte) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov4.170918.16287@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>, ib09@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de (Thomas Koenig) writes:
|> |> In article <1d3spsEINNbpm@uni-erlangen.de>, arras@forwiss.uni-erlangen.de (Michael Arras) writes:
|> 
|> |> Applications of fuzzy theory are much wider than AI, or even the comp
|> |> field; what about fuzzy logic in control systems, for example?
|> 
|> Agreed.
|> 
|> |> Putting it in the sci or sci.engr hierarchy would make more sense, IMHO.
|> 
|> Perhaps sci.fuzzy would be a good choice,

My first choice is "sci.fuzzy" ... second choice is "comp.fuzzy".

And, thanks Mr. Arras for starting an RFD.  By the way I saw a couple
neat "fuzzy" things while I was in Japan.  I'll post it later.

-- 
Yoke (Yokichi) Tanaka      Togai InfraLogic, Inc.    "fuzzy"
tanaka@til.com             Irvine, California, USA
uunet!til!tanaka           714-975-8522
In case you're wondering ... I am male.
Bud, Miller, Lite, Oly  -characters from Repo-man
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
From: rorschak@daimi.aau.dk (Jesper Lauridsen)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Xanth Watch
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 00:17:46 GMT

dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:

>I would also like it if some way were made so that those out there on
>the BBS echos could vote their minds also. 

How? Carrier pigeons? Please, give us an useful alternative to email.
-- 
Jesper Lauridsen        |  I survived the rec.arts.sf-lovers split
rorschak@daimi.aau.dk   | 
Xref: sparky news.groups:21094 news.admin.policy:270
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: A question, a comment
Date: 10 Nov 1992 19:38:32 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Nov10.185944.28723@muddcs.claremont.edu> irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith) writes:
>To use John Maynard's popular presidential election analogy, you'll
        well, almost... :-)
>notice that the Presidential Election Committee didn't call up registered
>Democrats asking them to get out and vote--the Democratic party did. Those
>who feel strongly about a vote ought to be willing to post an article in an
>effort to raise the awareness of other concerned, but possibly uninformed,
>net denizens.

...and, in fact, Dave Hayes has posted that not doing so was an error on his
part. I agree with that, and think that he should have been an active
participant while the process was going on; after all, the process is designed
to be open to just such participation.

>So, in summary, I don't think the Guidelines need to be changed. I think
>voting on proposals is, and ought to be, a self-selecting process, but I
>would encourage those who care about a proposal to do what they can to "get
>out the vote"--including posting clear announcements to affected groups if
>they feel the official announcements aren't sufficient.

This has been commonly done in the past, and it has been quite effective. I
cannot comprehend why someone so obviously against a renaming as Dave Hayes
was would skip such an obvious step.
-- 
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.
     We survived Jimmy Carter; we'll (probably) survive Bill Clinton.
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 7 Nov 1992 05:20:20 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Nov6.190715.22999@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
[about posting CFVs for renamed groups to the affested group only; I objected
that this would disenfranchise news admins]
>Then crosspost it to news.groups. Each rename should involve a clear
>subject line (e.g. RENAME rec.music.synth -> rec.music.makers.synth),
>and should be posted separately from other renames. 

1) You've completely removed the reason to post it to the affected group only:
to force folks to read the group.
2) You've (in the case of this reorg) quadrupled the news traffic, and the
mail traffic, to no real gain.

>>If that's the case, then what do they care what the group is called -
>>especially those on the other side of a Usenet-to-something-else gateway?
>Because their group might be fragmented. That's why. That's why *I* care.

One more time: THE ONLY REASON THE GROUP WOULD BE FRAGMENTED IS BECAUSE OF
OBSTINATE GATEWAY MAINTAINERS WHO REFUSE TO DO THEIR JOB!! How many times do I
have to repeat myself before you get the point??

Your argument is with the gateway maintainers. I can't say it any more plainly
than that. You have consistently refused to answer this point, except to bring
up the case of badly broken gateway software - and when I offered to help fix
it, you quit answering altogether.

>Voting for an American president is hardly relavent to voting for a newsgroup,
>nor is it a justifier for this situation. 

Voting on Usenet is like voting in the real world: If you don't vote, you let
those who do speak for you. This is true in Presidential elections, and it is
true on the net as well.
-- 
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.
     We survived Jimmy Carter; we'll (probably) survive Bill Clinton.
Newsgroups: news.groups