HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: visser@convex.com (Lance Visser)
Subject: Re: Serdar Argic (was Re: Meanwhile, back at news.admin.policy)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:02:50 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
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 <1gnbq0INN6d3@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) writes:

+>In article <visser.724483820@convex.convex.com>, visser@convex.com (Lance Visser) writes:
+>|> 	He has managed to do a great deal of damage to soc.history
+>|> and soc.culture.europe as groups by his postings.  There is nothing
+>|> than can be done about it though.

+>If it's really as bad as you say it is (and, given what I've seen of his
+>postings, I have no reason to doubt you), then why hasn't the site from which
+>he posts shut off his posting access?

+>If the site from which he posts is sympathetic to his behavior (unfortunately,
+>there are propaganda sites that support such activities) , then why haven't
+>their feed sites cut them off?

	The chain by which he gets on the net is:

	zuma.uucp->anatolia.uucp->uunet

	UUNET does not care about anything except the blood money they get
	for pumping his racism out on the net.  There is no way to pressure 
	them that I can think of.

	anatolia.uucp is run by Argic's close personal friend and 
	probable ideological soul-mate.  

	zuma.uucp may or may not even exist.  Its only connection to the
	outside world is news through anatolia.uucp which is a valid (on
	the maps) site.  

	I will say that I have not verified that this is still the path that
	the argic articles are arriving on the net from for a couple of 
	months.  Things may of changed.

	The whole reason multu became Argic and they went to this complicated
	system of uucp is that people were pressureing the sysadmins.





+>He's clearly violating both the spirit and letter of the etiquette and posting
+>rules found in news.announce.newusers and (by and large) accepted by people. 
+>So why does he still have posting access?

	There was an arguement about rules in news.admin a while back and 
the consensus was that his postings did not exactly break any rules. 
The biggest problem is that there is no way to know IF zuma.uucp (Argic's 
home machine) is real without access to anatolia.uucp.  And based on 
current information, the sysadmin has to be given the benifit of the
doubt as to its existance.  There is nothing in the rules that says you
can't have a news-but-no-mail uucp gateway between one machine and the
net.
 
	The people pretending to be Argic did make exactly one concession
in the past year.  They set the followup line to force all responses to
soc.culture.turkish.



Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [soc.men, et al.]  Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Followup-To: news.admin.policy,soc.men,soc.motss,soc.culture.new-zealand
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 13:52:17 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.motss,soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject:  Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
From: derek@nezsdc.icl.co.nz (Derek Tearne)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 22:16:27 GMT

In article <1gafqvINNe3j@transfer.stratus.com> dswartz@sw.stratus.com (Dan Swartzendruber) writes:
>In article <eumLVB2w165w@netlink.cts.com>, system@netlink.cts.com (System Administrator) writes:
>> 
>> We have been receiving a number of requests to censure Mr. Bowery for
>> his post (F81iVB1w165w@netlink.cts.com).  
>> 
>> NetLink is a public access system, and provides access for people to
>> exchange ideas and opinions -- any opinions, not just those that are
>> "politically correct."  
>> 
>> However, Mr. Bowery's post was in violation of soc.motss charter and
>> was also innapropriate for the other groups as well.  He has been 
>> counseled about proper net etiquette, and had his posting access temporarily
>> suspended.
>> 
>
>Great.  So in other words, he's free to say whatever he wants.  Except he isn't.
>Ever consider a career in politics?
>
>And no, I didn't think his posting was anything other than hateful garbage.

I think sometimes we shoot ourselves in our collective feet when we stop 
people like this from posting.  If we exclude them from our vision we tend
to forget that they exist.  Then we live in quiet complacency thinking society
is free from nutters.      

Let him post - let him get shot down in flames - maybe he has a thick skin 
and won't notice - but - just maybe - after repeatedly being informed of the
distance from the <usenet> societal norm which his postings take him - he 
may change his attitudes.  Sometimes peer group pressure can be a positive 
thing.  


After all there are always kill files (a freudian name if ever there was one).


-- 
Derek Tearne.   --   derek@nezsdc.icl.co.nz   --    Fujitsu New Zealand   -- 
 _______
 _______} This is a Usenet condom<tm>.  Roll the condom over the .signature 
	  file before posting to protect yourself from .sig retro-virii
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: dgilbert@gamiga.uucp (dgilbert)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:22:20 GMT
Organization: TheHd:s/.organization
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
Subject: The Serdar Argic thing.
Reply-To: dgilbert%gamiga@dweomer.org
Distribution: world

	I've only been following this discussion for a couple of days, but
today's posts seemed only to confim (not deny as they were intended
to) the position of the net in general vs. Serdar Argic.  In
particular, he quoted a short amount of my previous post, then
proceeded in a completely off topic post of some other information
that has absolutely no relavance to news.admin.policy whatsoever.

	I believe this only strenghens my previous arguement --- that all
people posting to usenet should have a valid mail address.  Why?
Because I am experience enough with UsNet to want to reply personally
to this person --- most likely with a flame.  I would otherwise not
want to bother the other fine people of this group with my post.  This
is very desireable for everybody.

	I don't care what Serdar Argic wants to say.  He? has the right to
say it, and I will fight to protect that right.  However, as one of
the very few controls put on UsNet --- for the sake of our sanity, I
should be able to flame him, or mail him... or converse with him
privately.  Of course, he could ignore all these... that's his
prviledge also.

	I suppose it only takes one person to change things.  It also only
takes one person to create a need for things to be changed.  IMHO
posting access should *require* a mail address.  Is that too much to
ask?

Dave.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|David Gilbert, University Of Guelph, Ontario | Two things can only be     |
|Preferred : dweomer.org!gamiga!dgilbert      |  equal if and only if they |
|Possible  : dgilbert@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca|   are precisely opposite.  |
---------------------------------------------------------GLO----------------
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.groups
From: dhd@exnet.co.uk (Damon)
Subject: Re: Folklore, synth, and guidelines
Organization: ExNet Systems Ltd Public Access News, London, UK
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 22:56:20 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.214523.12455@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (JKF) writes:
>>Let the issue drop.  Please.
>
>Why? 

Because a lot of people are very bored with this whole `molehill' and
I'd rather not have to put *anyone* in my kill file at all.

Damon
-- 
Damon Hart-Davis                          Internet: dhd@exnet.co.uk, d@hd.org

Public-access UNIX (Suns), news and mail for UK#5 per month.  FIRST MONTH FREE.
[1.35] Cheap Sun eqpt.  UUCP news/mail feeds.  Tel/Fax: +44 81 755 0077.
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Folklore, synth, and guidelines
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 13:07:34 GMT

jfurr@polaris.async.vt.edu (Joel Furr) writes:
>If the readers of alt.folklore.computers are knowledgeable enough about the
>meaning of subject lines 'n' stuff to be able to rise up and defend their
>group, why should the synth people be treated as clueless idiots incapable of
>any comprehension of USENET hijinks whatsoever?  

Hey...choose your names carefully! Try "innocent novices unaware of what a
name change can do" instead of "clueless idiots"...unless that was a freudian
slip of the fingers of course. (Betraying your real feelings?)

[C'mon man...I thought you were "Jay Maynard Flamer Association HQ". You've
got to do better than that...you left yourself wide open...Jay'll roast you
alive if you're that careless.]

>have gotten mighty upset if someone else had advanced the position,
>pre-renaming, that the readers of rec.music.synth were too damn stupid to know
>what a vote was all about.  

Certainly the alt.foklore people know exactly that an alt group will be
rmgrouped (and we all know how successful _that_ will be) based on an
unmoderation of a Usenet group. And this isn't even written anywhere in
guidelines or newbie docs or anything. This is a REAL BIG CLUE that people
in that group are uncommonly aware of USENET politics...unlike 80% of the 
groups out there now. 

Which proves my points about elitism exactly...or let me use a better word...
FAVORITISM. Think about it. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

   Advice is priceless; when it becomes interference it is preposterous.
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: The Serdar Argic thing.
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Turkey Division
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 21:46:43 GMT

In article <DGILBERT.92Dec18212220@gamiga.uucp> dgilbert%gamiga@dweomer.org writes:

>	I suppose it only takes one person to change things.  It also only
>takes one person to create a need for things to be changed.  IMHO
>posting access should *require* a mail address.  Is that too much to
>ask?

I don't think that's unreasonable, but who's the "one person" who's
going to enforce or maintain that policy?

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn)
Subject: Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 14:52:57 GMT

In article <1gg54aINNfm6@gaia.ucs.orst.edu> stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>In article <Bz7AoC.HAJ@cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>>CAF-News has had several articles about how much news admin should
>>enforce the charters of unmoderated newsgroup. I'm enclosing
>>references to those articles.
>
>Who is CAF-News, and who put them in a position of authority over all
>news admins? I.e., who cares what CAF-News thinks news admins should be
>doing?


Who cares?   Well, most enlightened folk care about reading opinions,
thoughts and relevent commentary.  This doesn't mean CAF-News is in
_a_position_of_authority_, it means it has an opinion that those
pondering the issue might want to consider.

And these opinions are articles written by netfolk just like
yourself.

Come on, John, you don't really think everybody who has an opinion
should just shut up, do you?


Andy
-- 
:-------------------------------------------------------------------------:
:  Andy Dunn           <amdunn@mongrel.UUCP> or <dunn5177@mach1.WLU.CA>   :
:  "AT&T thinks Usenet is an Underground organization" - are we really?   :
:-------------------------------------------------------------------------:
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [soc.men, et al.]  Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Followup-To: news.admin.policy,soc.men,soc.motss,soc.culture.new-zealand
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 13:51:58 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.motss,soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject:  Jim Bowery's offensive posting
From: system@netlink.cts.com (System Administrator)
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 92 19:43:01 PST


We have been receiving a number of requests to censure Mr. Bowery for
his post (F81iVB1w165w@netlink.cts.com).  

NetLink is a public access system, and provides access for people to
exchange ideas and opinions -- any opinions, not just those that are
"politically correct."  

However, Mr. Bowery's post was in violation of soc.motss charter and
was also innapropriate for the other groups as well.  He has been 
counseled about proper net etiquette, and had his posting access temporarily
suspended.

Mr. Bowery speaks only for himself.  His opinions do not necessarily 
reflect those of NetLink Online Communications, its owner or operators.

Thanks to all who brought this to our attention.

Scott McClure
System Administrator
NetLink Online Communications



--
 Scott McClure, System Administrator    (system@netlink.cts.com)
 NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From: phardie@nastar.uucp (Pete Hardie)
Subject: Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Organization: Digital Transmission Systems, Duluth, GA.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 15:59:59 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.131003.8145@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>>Carl's appointed himself world-wide guardian of politically correct free
>>speech.  Best way to handle it is to simply put him in your kill file.
>
>Hmmm....looks like more ELITISM (post only what we think you should post)
>from news admins. Way to go Mr De Armond.

Sounds like stereotyping, Mr. Hayes.  DeArmond is hardly a representative of
news admins.  I would hazard a guess that his views are not shared by anything
approaching a majority of news admins. [ Note - I do not claim that those
views are correct or incorrect;  merely that they are not held by most other
news admin personnel ]



-- 
Pete Hardie:  phardie@nastar  (voice) (404) 497-0101
Digital Transmission Systems, Inc., Duluth GA
Member, DTS Dart Team           |  cat * | egrep -v "signature virus|infection" 
Position:  Goalie               |
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.groups
From: jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (JKF)
Subject: Re: Folklore, synth, and guidelines
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 15:32:23 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.130734.8055@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>jfurr@polaris.async.vt.edu (Joel Furr) writes:
>>If the readers of alt.folklore.computers are knowledgeable enough about the
>>meaning of subject lines 'n' stuff to be able to rise up and defend their
>>group, why should the synth people be treated as clueless idiots incapable of
>>any comprehension of USENET hijinks whatsoever?  
>
>Hey...choose your names carefully! Try "innocent novices unaware of what a
>name change can do" instead of "clueless idiots"...unless that was a freudian
>slip of the fingers of course. (Betraying your real feelings?)

No, my real feelings on this issue are that this is one of the most
pathetic examples of making a mountain out of a molehill that I've ever
seen.  You're assuming that the average rec.music.synth reader had an IQ
about that of the common woodchuck (no flames from rec.humor.oracle.d
people, please), and that it truly makes a difference whether we stick the
word "makers" in there or not.  Let the issue die!  There're starving
people in Somalia, Dave, think of all the lives you could save if you
spent the time that you _currently_ spend flaming people about the
renaming soliciting donations for famine relief!  

>
>[C'mon man...I thought you were "Jay Maynard Flamer Association HQ". You've
>got to do better than that...you left yourself wide open...Jay'll roast you
>alive if you're that careless.]

He can _try_.  However, as USENET's native australopithecine, Jay cannot
handle higher concepts such as logic and common sense and will fail
miserably if he enters a battle of wits half-armed.

>Certainly the alt.folklore people know exactly that an alt group will be
>rmgrouped (and we all know how successful _that_ will be) based on an
>unmoderation of a Usenet group. And this isn't even written anywhere in
>guidelines or newbie docs or anything. This is a REAL BIG CLUE that people
>in that group are uncommonly aware of USENET politics...unlike 80% of the 
>groups out there now. 
>
>Which proves my points about elitism exactly...or let me use a better word...
>FAVORITISM. Think about it. 

I did think about it, Dave.  I think you're right, too.  Elvis _is_ alive
in Paraguay training commandos to storm the Bastille and free Napoleon.

Let the issue drop.  Please.
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Folklore, synth, and guidelines
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 12:57:56 GMT

cathyf@is.rice.edu (Catherine Anne Foulston) writes:
>I've been wondering, if the current guidelines are so inadequate, how
>come almost 800 people, a large turnout for Usenet, have already voted
>on a proposal whose Subject line only mentions the unmoderation of a
>group that hardly anyone reads because it has hardly any traffic?

And then...

>I am sure people will now pick this apart point by point and start
>telling me oh, computer folklore readers are more likely to know how
>the net works, and oh, those people only posted warnings because
>they'd read all the discussions & flames about synth, and oh, the
>folklore group is just a bunch of elitist long-time netter news
>admins, and a lot of other stuff. 

Well...you answered your own question. The folklore people were more
aware of consequences. 

>people care about the name of the folklore group, and not enough
>people cared enough about the name of the synth group (until flamage
>and stubbornness, that were unnecessary, had ill effects on it).

What's wrong with trying to equalize the awareness levels of the 
other "ignorant and therefore vulnerable" newsgroups? Or to fight
for their sake?

>When the folklore vote's over we'll see if the elitist news admins
>and experienced netters managed to rename a group against the wishes
>of its powerless disenfranchised readers.  

Alt.folklore.computers POWERLESS? That's a good one...

>Seriously, I don't have any ill will against anybody -- I just think
>the system we have works ok and that claims that it's broken are
>(unintentionally) exaggerated.

And you have a perfect right to feel that way. I disagree completely
of course. Ok?

>	making a note to bring the asbestos long-johns tomorrow

Who wants to flame you? You just have a naive opinion IMO....8-)
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

By definition, when you are investigating the unknown, you do not know what you
will find or even when you have found it. 
Xref: sparky news.admin.policy:803 news.groups:24569
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.groups
Subject: Re: Folklore, synth, and guidelines
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:58:07 GMT
Followup-To: news.admin.policy
Organization: negligable

In article <1992Dec14.214523.12455@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>
>If it were truly a transparent change, I wouldn't care eather. Synth readers
>are learning the hard way about USENET. That's just as pointless as arguing
>about the name.

And the ones at your site are learning even more, having been cut off
from their former associates by your refusal to carry the renamed group.


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Philosopher and plowman			|
each must know his part			|	-Richard Hartman	
to build a new mentality		|	hartman@uLogic.COM
closer to the heart!			|

Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
Subject: Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Biological Sciences.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:08:01 GMT

In article <8107@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>
>
>>ANNOTATED REFERENCES
>
>And another thing: Is there anyone else out there who finds Carl's practice of
>including voluminous references in _every_ article he posts as annoying as
>Hasan B Mutlu/Serdar Argic's similar practice?

    I certainly value the references part of CMK's posts. It is _extremely_
refreshing to have someone cite facts rather than hearsay. I would say
that these references have done more to avert flame wars in the policy and
admin groups than anything else.

DanZ

-- 
This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions,
narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do
not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.  

Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: Newsgroup creation guidelines (was Re: Folklore, synth, and guidelines)
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
	<EMCGUIRE.92Dec17094511@fuller.intellection.com>
	<1992Dec18.210827.52872@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 18:29:15 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.210827.52872@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:

   Can you clarify what you think the "needless complications" will
   be?  With automated software doing the actual vote tallying,
   why is it so terrible if instead of a six-vote ballot, circumstances
   required you to have two three-vote ballots?

Actually, I was thinking more of the complications introduced to the
voter.  A single vote article, containing a complete explanation of
the proposed changes and a single ballot, seems simpler to me than
multiple cross-referenced vote articles with multiple ballots, each of
which I should find and vote on if the proposed changes are relevant
to me.  Rename proposals do not need to be artificially separated into
multiple ballots to accomplish what you want.  Just use a different
subject line on the same vote article as appropriate.

   There's no point in putting something onto a ballot until you've
   first explained to the new users why they should read ballots.

   All of my proposals are based on the premise that readers
   have a limited time to read articles, and that by default
   they will ignore articles unless there is a compelling
   reason to read them.

My feedback was based on the same premise.  The problem is, how do you
get people to read the "guidelines for voters?"  Readers are far more
likely to be motivated to pay attention by a well written subject line
warning about the vote in their favorite newsgroup itself.
-- 
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.admin.policy