HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: USENET FLOW ANALYSIS for AUG 92: Top 1000 sites
Keywords: arbitron, statistics, flow
Organization: The Gator Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-3745
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 21:58:36 GMT

davel@news.arc.nasa.gov (Dave Liebreich) writes:

>larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>>reid@decwrl.dec.com (Brian Reid) writes:
>>
>>> Rank   weight  name
>>>============================
>>
>>
>>this is all I received -- did anyone else get the entire list this month?


>The Net must be dead.  Congratulations to all who predicted that the
>imminent death of USENET would occur in August, 1992.

To date, I have received 23 messages from folks getting the same thing --
-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Xref: sparky news.admin:7610 news.newusers.questions:4015 alt.internet.services:768
From: ses@cmns-sun.think.com (Simon Edward Spero)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.newusers.questions,alt.internet.services
Subject: Re: Books on the Internet?
Followup-To: alt.internet.services,news.newusers.questions
Date: 15 Sep 92 19:39:25
Organization: What's your clearance, citizen?
NNTP-Posting-Host: cmns-sun.think.com
In-reply-to: kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com's message of Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:27:53 GMT


In article <Bun2AH.DDG@portal.hq.videocart.com> kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger) writes:

   This may be the wrong place to put this, but I don't know where else to put
   it :-)

The best place for this type of query is  probably alt.internet.services; in
the mainstream hierachy, news.newusers.questions comes closest. 

   I am looking for a published book, whether FTPable or something you buy in a
   store, which covers user-level Internet services.  The common stuff needs to
   be in here -- how to telnet, ftp, archie, gopher, mail, trn, etc.  

The best source here is probably Brendan P. Kehoe's "Zen and the art of the
Internet". The first edition was just an ascii text file, and is still 
available for ftp. It's on ftp.cs.widener.edu in pub/zen as Zen-1 ... etc
Otherwise, use archie to find your nearest copy. 

The second edition has been published by Prentice Hall. A text dump of a 
MARC record with the details follows.

Simon

[8] = data = "920813s1993    nju      b    001 0 eng  #"
[10] = data = "  $a   92018075 #"
[20] = data = "  $a0130107786 :$c$22.00#"
[40] = data = "  $aDLC$cDLC$dCU-SB#"
[50] = data = "00$aTK5105.875.I57$bK44 1993#"
[82] = data = "00$a384.3$220#"
[100] = data = "1 $aKehoe, Brendan P.#"
[245] = data = "10$aZen and the art of the internet :$ba beginner's guide /
		$cBrendan P. Kehoe.#"
[250] = data = "  $a2nd ed.#"
[260] = data = "  $aEnglewood Cliffs, NJ :$bPTR Prentice Hall,$cc1993.#"
[263] = data = "  $a9301#"
[300] = data = "  $axv, 112 p. ;$c23 cm.#"
[440] = data = " 0$aPrentice Hall series in innovative technology#"
[504] = data = "  $aIncludes bibliographical references and index.#"
[650] = data = " 0$aInternet (Computer network)*"
--
-----
Guest account at TMC 	|	Just Another  WAIS Hacker | DOD# 0612
From: thorn@cc.mcgill.ca (Ron HALL)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Wanted news feed MTL.QC.CA area
Date: 10 Sep 92 14:18:39 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: McGill University, Computing Centre

We are currently re-organising Usenet access in this part
of the world. Are there sites that are willing to add us
to there already congested backlog?

We do feed other sites so you would be doing us a favour.

Please respond to thorn@cc.mcgill.ca.
-- 
       Ron Hall       | DISCLAIMER:  If you are      | "If there is a light at
       Analyst        | willing to take my word for  | the end of the tunnel,
 <thorn@cc.mcgill.ca> | it, then you are in more     | then it is time to order
   +1 514 398 3718    | trouble than you you thought | more tunnel !"
From: jgreely@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely)
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Violating First Amendment!  Get a clue, randal person!
Date: 15 Sep 92 21:10:15 GMT
Followup-To: poster
Organization: Ohio State University Computer and Information Science
Originator: jgreely@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu

In article <9209142155@zuma.UUCP> sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic) writes:
>Sorry, but your argument falls flat on its face. I don't live in "the 
>other scores of countries".

"You" don't live in the US either, for all we know.  The point *is*
valid; what holds the net together is not Constitution, but
convention.  Eventually your failure to respect those conventions will
lead others to do likewise, and your articles will not be seen by
anyone (no matter what name they appear under).

  If you're truly interested in "spreading uncomfortable truths" (as
opposed to pissing off anyone who disagrees with you), you should
reconsider your methods before you get stomped into putty.

>Now try dealing with the rest of what I wrote.

If I were interested in the rest of what you wrote, I'd read the
appropriate soc.* groups.  Do you really think that posting mounds of
irrelevant material to a group actually pleases the readers, swaying
them to your views?  If so, you're in rather desperate need of a clue.
Get two, they're small.


                "Look, Max!  It's those pyramid-building aliens I've
                 heard about in speculative films and books!  They
                 came to Earth to build these immense structures to
                 keep their razor blades sharp and their hamburger
                 fresh."
                                  (Sam and Max, "Fair Wind to Java")
-- 
J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely)
Xref: sparky news.admin.policy:10 news.admin:7595
From: jerry@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Jerry Aguirre)
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.admin
Subject: Re: Not violating First Amendment! Get a clue, noisy person!
Date: 15 Sep 92 01:52:34 GMT
Followup-To: news.admin.policy
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino CA, USA

In article <gwh.091492.12@lurnix.com> gwh@lurnix.com (George William Herbert) writes:
>Cosar set up a uucp link from his machine to zuma.UUCP, whoever is
>actually running it.  A news-only uucp link.  I.e. no mail.
>[this is a neat trick.]

We could all ask uunet to put myname/zuma in our feed entries.
Unfortunately given the "mesh" nature of usenet it would take a lot
of admins doing that before all the leaks could be plugged.

The problem with fanatics is that they think that their point is the
most important point in the world and worth breaking any rules to get
across.  How would he feel if I walked in uninvited, one of his ethnic
discussions, and started ranting on about the proliferation of "alt"
groups, commercial postings, INN vs. C news, NNTP vs. NFS, etc?

Unfortunately we can not reply by email and replying to the postings is
violating the same rules he does by inflicting unrelated discussion on
the readers of the non admin groups.  You don't suppose that he actually
reads news.admin do you?
From: spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford)
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Not violating First Amendment!  Get a clue, noisy person!
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:04:29 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University

What Randal said.

Plus, Usenet is international and multicultural in scope.  The First
Amendment means something in the US, but holds little sway in the
other scores of countries where Usenet is received.
-- 
Gene Spafford
Software Engineering Research Center & Dept. of Computer Sciences
Purdue University, W. Lafayette IN 47907-1398
Internet:  spaf@cs.purdue.edu	phone:  (317) 494-7825
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Not violating First Amendment! Get a clue, noisy person!
Date: 14 Sep 92 20:23:59 GMT
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA

merlyn@ora.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes:
>	Freedom of the Press does not mean that everyone gets a Free Press.

Then what good is freedom of the press?
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

  "Every extreme attitude is a flight from the self."  -- Eric Hoffer.
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: Not violating First Amendment!  Get a clue, noisy person!
Summary: The converse of that is also true
Organization: VideOcart Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:14:50 GMT

In article <19535@ector.cs.purdue.edu> spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford) writes:
>What Randal said.
>
>Plus, Usenet is international and multicultural in scope.  The First
>Amendment means something in the US, but holds little sway in the
>other scores of countries where Usenet is received.

The converse of that is also true.  If you don't like what someone posts, or
it is a problem in your country, then it's your problem.  The person in the
country of origin may have every right to say what he or she does
(especially in the US).

--
Karl Denninger 		Inet:  kdenning@hq.videocart.com
VideOcart Inc.		Voice: (312) 987-5022
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: paul@xcluud.sccsi.com (Paul Hutmacher)
Subject: Re: Not violating First Amendment! Get a clue, noisy person!
Organization: Greater Montrose UFO Appreciation Society & Data Haven
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 12:31:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.202359.23445@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>Then what good is freedom of the press?

Actually, freedom of the press belongs to those who own the press :)


-- 
Paul Hutmacher     -/-    Houston, Texas    -\-    paul@xcluud.sccsi.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's not an information highway.  It's a maze of twisty little passages,
all different, inhabited by MUD players."   -- JQ Johnson  (thanks Joe!)
From: merlyn@ora.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Not violating First Amendment! Get a clue, noisy person!
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:19:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: romulus.MERLYN.92Sep14141944
	<1992Sep14.202359.23445@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
Organization: Stonehenge Consulting Services; Portland, Oregon, USA

In article <1992Sep14.202359.23445@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:

   merlyn@ora.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes:
   >	Freedom of the Press does not mean that everyone gets a Free Press.

   Then what good is freedom of the press?

I didn't see the smiley.  I looked.  So I'm going to presume you need
a serious answer.

Freedom of the Press restricts *government* from passing *laws*
restricting the *content* of speech (or "speech acts").  If *I* want
to write a newsletter about how bad the government is, and pass it out
to everyone, I can't be shutdown by the government on the basis of
content alone.  True, I'm held responsible for the net effect of the
message, like printing something libelous or something that incites
property damage (Tom Metzger got canned in Oregon for this with his
pin^H^H^Hskinhead videos and newsletters last year).  But the act of
speaking my opinion, no matter how outrageous and contrary it is, is
protected, as long as I do it on my own dime.

How does this apply to Usenet?  Well, within the United States, the
national, regional, and local governments can't touch us for saying
that they're all too bloated and mucked up.  But Usenet, being a
cooperative anarchy, has its *own* rules and etiquitte-- part of which
is respecting the folklore and common goals in a gentleman's
agreement. And part of this etiquitte is that you post messages in
groups according to group charters, and that you avoid doing anything
on Usenet that you wouldn't do face-to-face with someone, and that you
understand and respect the fact that your message is being carried
worldwide on the good will of many thousands of companies and
instituitions in hopes that it will benefit all concerned.

It is in this last sentence that I challenge the noisy poster.  We
have seen a number of "Usenet violations".  Time to stop, please.

Just another long-time usenetter,
--
Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
merlyn@reed.edu (guest account) merlyn@ora.com (better for permanent record)
cute quote: "Welcome to Portland, Oregon -- home of the California Raisins!"
From: romain@salt.eng.pyramid.com (Romain Kang)
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Not violating First Amendment! Get a clue, noisy person!
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:01:32 GMT
Reply-To: romain@pyramid.com
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp, San Jose, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: salt.eng.pyramid.com

Since I'm late in joining this discussion, maybe I'm missing something,
but...

I suggest ignoring anything from zuma.UUCP.  If the zuma gang does not
want any mail to get to them, but respond to followup posts, it sounds
suspiciously like they are flame-baiting USENET at large and are not
interested in honest communication.  Serdar Ardic's posting which cites
inaccessible or fictitious sources (<9209102150@zuma.UUCP>) only
reinforces this impression.  Indeed, Mr. Ardic himself is inaccessible
and perhaps fictitious, though I am willing to be disproved on this point.

Just say no to unhealthy relationships.  Personally, I will not waste
any more time on zuma.UUCP.
--
"Eggheads unite!  You have nothing to lose but your yolks!" -Adlai Stevenson
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: visser@convex.com (Lance Visser)
Subject: Re: Not violating First Amendment! Get a clue, noisy person!
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 03:35:11 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <56120@olivea.atc.olivetti.com> jerry@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Jerry Aguirre) writes:

>In article <gwh.091492.12@lurnix.com> gwh@lurnix.com (George William Herbert) writes:
>>Cosar set up a uucp link from his machine to zuma.UUCP, whoever is
>>actually running it.  A news-only uucp link.  I.e. no mail.
>>[this is a neat trick.]

>We could all ask uunet to put myname/zuma in our feed entries.
>Unfortunately given the "mesh" nature of usenet it would take a lot
>of admins doing that before all the leaks could be plugged.

+>The problem with fanatics is that they think that their point is the
+>most important point in the world and worth breaking any rules to get
+>across.  How would he feel if I walked in uninvited, one of his ethnic
+>discussions, and started ranting on about the proliferation of "alt"
+>groups, commercial postings, INN vs. C news, NNTP vs. NFS, etc?

	You underestimate the sort of behavior this particular fanatic
engages in.  He does not discuss anything with anyone.  If you attempt
discussion with him, the typical response has been one line of insults
followed by another report from his "sources".  



	What is being practiced is the "big lie".  I.e. these people 
post and repost their volumes of propoganda (10-14 messages per day).
They dont respond to questions, errors pointed out or much of anything
else.  They just post the same stuff over and over again.
	I mean he doesn't even have e-mail and is in all probably posting
under a false name.



+>Unfortunately we can not reply by email and replying to the postings is
+>violating the same rules he does by inflicting unrelated discussion on
+>the readers of the non admin groups.  You don't suppose that he actually
+>reads news.admin do you?

	He does at the very least to create his fill-in-the-blanks 
"you are violating by constitutional rights" postings.
From: news@wolves.uucp (The Wolfe of the Den)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Why we need a "Copyright: " field (was: Re: NetNews/CD . . .)
Date: 9 Sep 92 19:18:09 GMT
Organization: Wolves Den UNIX
X-Md4-Signature: c1af54dd04099f61a7c830e2908d0e78

In article <256@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>
>Yes, but the article exists on multiple electromagnetic storage
>devices simultaneously, so my question is whether there is an
>"original" of the work beyond which it can be said that "this is
>an authorized/unauthorized copy"?

Of course there is an "original."  Some human being somewhere either
typed the information in to the computer (where typing is not limited to
manual input) or edited text that originated in some process that was
ultimately commanded by a human.

For an electronic item, the "original" is the temporally "first" storage
of the work in the electronic medium.
-- 
Usenet Net News Administrator @ The Wolves Den  (G. Wolfe Woodbury)
news%wolves@cs.duke.edu     ...duke!wolves!news     "We don't need no
There is a real person who watches this account.   stinking disclaimers"
Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal.computing
From: kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: NetNews Contract? NOT!
Organization: The Rhode Island Internet Systems Cooperative Network
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1992 09:08:55 GMT

whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl) writes:

>Your limiting one machine is certainly not going to impact with any
>significance the "far and wide" distribution of the network.  

Hogwash. If my site is UUNET, you bet propagation gets affected.


>As far as I can tell, any court would make a presumption that the
>person(s) involved with connecting a specific site have the authority to
>do so.

So, if I were to call McDonald's and order 500 cheeseburgers for everyone
in my company, and said "charge it to the company", the courts would "assume"
that I had "authority" to speak for my company?

Perhaps I should start calling around town and ordering items for you,
since I could use a few things, and the courts would "presume" that the
person doing the contacting (me) would have the authority to do so.


>In fact, I don't see any way that the question of that authority
>would be called into question unless it was being used by a site to
>try and eliminate some liability that may have stemmed from a determination
>of liability because of the connectivity to the network.

Agency is a simple concept in Law of Contracts. Its also an issue here,
as you claim that someone attaching a computer to a network has in fact
bound a company to some vague terms which 10,000,000 people are supposed
to have "agreed" to. 

Then again, since you seem intent with violating every other tenent of
Contract Law, why should this one be any different.


>As Mr. Spock would say, that isn't logical.  If the net exists, it is
>an entity.  

Can you provide me with its mailing address and state of legal residence,
please. "The Net" is a concept, not an "entity" recognized as a legal
individual capable of entering into contracts.


Let me know when you've finished authoring your first Law book. I love to
read comedy.

MD
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your 
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com            /  parents never had it, chances 
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won't either...
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /
From: gwh@soda.berkeley.edu (George William Herbert)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Mutlu violating Usenet RFC
Followup-To: news.admin
Date: 11 Sep 1992 07:58:42 GMT
Organization: Dis-
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
Summary: It's getting Better, folks.

In article <BuEIoz.1Cn@news.orst.edu> stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>The PRIMARY thing that not registering a UUCP site means is that it is
>not registered. It also means, as a side effect, that automated routing
>of mail cannot be done, not that mail cannot be delivered. It certainly
>does not mean that the site does not exist, nor does it mean that it
>is not connected to "the greater mail net".
>
>You have failed to prove that the site zuma does not exist. You have
>also not proven that the posts with that as a From: address did not
>come from there. You certainly have not proven that the RFC (which one?)
>is being violated, and thus your call for censoring that site fails.

RFC850 and 1036 both require a valid Internet format electronic mail
address for the individual sending the message in the From: line.

A site that isn't in NIC tables, isn't nameserved by anyone, isn't in
the world maps, and didn't provide a mail gateway path in the
message fails to have a valid email address for the sender, because
I and anyone else not right next to him can't send him email.
Even a Path: that can be traced back is enough for my tastes
though a technical violation, but since the posts in question
are going through the ucbvax news gateway the path is untraceable.
Ucbvax doesn't know where zuma is.

Further proof that the faked From: address is intentionally that
way to discourage reply mail arrived in my lap today when Ahmet Cosar,
system administrator of anatolius.michigan.com (aka. anatolius.mn.org
and uunet!anatolius, apparently) threatened to take legal action
against me for my suggestion that the right way to deal with the
Mutlu-style postings was for anyone who was offended to email
the offensive or inappropriate posting back to the sender along
with a complaint about it.  This is being taken care of off Usenet.

	BTW, please, nobody out there take my origional suggestion to mean
flood the site with extraneous hate mail.  If you have a problem with
a specific post from that site, complain about that specific post 
and that one only (and include a copy 8-) and only send one complaint
per posting.  No more.  More is unethical, cedes the moral high ground,
and is potentially illegal if you're really obnoxious and send way
too much volume at them.

   
   -george william herbert
   gwh@soda.berkeley.edu  gwh@lurnix.com 
++ copyright 1992 george william herbert. All rights reserved.  Permission   ++
++ granted for Usenet transmission/use and followup/reply articles/mail use  ++

Xref: sparky news.admin:7561 comp.unix.wizards:3890
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Tuning Unix for lots of small files...
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:42:27 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

(The choice of cross-posting may seem haphazard.  Reason is that I believe
this is a unix-wizardly question (our Unix guru doesn't know the answer,
and our set of FM's don't cast any enlightenment), but on the other hand
I believe that the issue was discussed in news.admin maybe a year ago.)

Anyhow, I have a vague memory of hearing that there is a parameter
which can be fiddled when doing a vmunix build, which will increase the
space reserved by the system for caching information about open inodes
(or dirs, maybe?), and so might improve performance in an environment
where the system is doing not very much (computationally), but using a
lot of (small) files to do it.  Can anyone provide enough further info
to help us find and twiddle this, as that describes precisely the
situation this little box is in?

My memory suggests that the answer was more-or-less system-independent,
at least across normal variants of Unix, but if it matters the systems
we'd be interested in having the answer for are various flavors of
SunOS 4.[01].*

Cheers...

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal.computing