HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:08:30 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.184545.1950@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
>Please explain how the casual or new Usenet reader would have known that  
>the proposal messages affected rec.music.synth from their subject lines.  

Please explain how the casual or new USENET reader would have known that
this thread dealt with rec.music.synth from its subject line.

What, subject lines are just a brief introduction to what the article is
about? It doesn't always contain the entire contents of the article?
Gee, chock one up to net experience.

>Show where:
>
>1. RFD and CFV are defined as acronyms and their impact is explained.

At the top of every RFD and CFV.

>In the absence of 1 and 2, show were "RFD: rec.music.makers.* groups"  
>states that:
>
>1. A reorg is occuring
>
>2. You can vote on it

"RFD" means neither of these things. It never has, and nobody has ever
said that it did.

>All in all I think it's a broad class of people that you are calling  
>"ignorant". And aside from "net experience" there isn't a way to gain this  
>knowledge.

Net experience: reading one RFD to see what RFD means, and one CFV to
see what CFV means. Boy, what a great deal of experience that takes.
I am overwhelmed by the effort. Can I take a nap now?

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Intentional ignorance of newsgroup creation (was Re: *BAD*...)
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:45:13 GMT

chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>As long as you view r.m.s readers as "innocent and powerless", you'll
>keep missing the point that they are neither.  They are guilty of
>ignoring important facets of the workings of Usenet.  They have just
>as much power in the newsgroup creation process as anyone else does.

Only if they know that they HAVE that power. If they don't even know
that the power exists, how are they going to WANT to know enough at all?
Guilt isn't appropriate when the awareness of the situation isn't even
there in the first place. 

>You'll do yourself a favor if you take off that Lone Ranger mask and
>get down off your high horse.

Someone's got to do it. Otherwise the Usenet rampshod effect takes over. 

And they don't even get kissed first. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Don't teach the blind until you have practiced living with closed eyes
From: rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 7 Nov 92 03:45:26 GMT
Organization: GSP Whitewater Slalom Racing Team

In article <ZVTSBQ3T@cc.swarthmore.edu> hildebra@math.wisc.edu (Jeff Hildebrand) writes:
>	I don't know how the CFV was organized. However there was clearly
>a lot going on in this vote so I suspect it was long. If there was no
>summary at the top of what items were included in the CFV, then it would
>be a lot easier to miss.

Sigh.  Instead of "suspecting it was long" or saying "if there was no
summary", why not go back and look it up in the archives?

To save you the trouble, reproduced below the first part of the CFV.
In 26 lines, 6 of which are blank, it summarizes the proposals,
specifically lists each one, and makes a brief comment about the
possible impact on the alt.* hierarchy.  I would like to think
that this makes this one of the more succinct proposals; that was
certainly my intention, as I don't like reading long-winded CFV's either.

Forgive me if I'm getting a bit testy over this, but this is the third time
I've had to repost sections of the CFD and CFV in response to allegations
made about them which are simply not true.

---Rsk

CFV> Introduction: There are several newsgroups in the alt.* hierarchy which
CFV> are utilized for the discussion of various musical instruments.  The traffic
CFV> in these groups and the degree of participation from posters to the
CFV> rec.music.* groups indicate that it might be time to consider shifting
CFV> these groups to rec.music.makers, creating another group, and renaming
CFV> an existing group.  Extensive discussion on these topics has resulted
CFV> in three draft proposals, of which this is the most recent.
CFV> 
CFV> Proposal A: Create rec.music.makers.guitar.
CFV> Charter: "Electric and acoustic guitar techniques and equipment"
CFV> 
CFV> Proposal B: Create rec.music.makers.bass.
CFV> Charter: "Upright bass and bass guitar techniques and equipment"
CFV> 
CFV> Proposal C: Create rec.music.makers.guitar.tablature.
CFV> Charter: "Guitar tablature/chords, associated discussion and requests".
CFV> 
CFV> Proposal D: Create rec.music.makers.percussion.
CFV> Charter: "Percussion (including drums) techniques and equipment"
CFV> 
CFV> Proposal E: Rename rec.music.synth to rec.music.makers.synth
CFV> Charter: "Synthesizers and computer music"  [UNCHANGED FROM CURRENT]
CFV> 
CFV> If proposal A passes, it is anticipated that alt.guitar will be removed.
CFV> If proposal B passes, it is anticipated that alt.bass will be removed.
CFV> If proposal C passes, it is anticipated that alt.guitar.tab will be removed.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: "BAD" music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:27:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.162454.27395@daimi.aau.dk> rorschak@daimi.aau.dk  
(Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
> 
> >I and a number of other people have suggested (and no one responds to  
> >these postitive suggestions) that the guideline should be that subject  
> >lines for discussions and votes should DIRECTKY state what existing  
> >newsgroups they would affect. Is this too difficult? At least it's a  
> >suggestion.
> 
> >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.
> 

Oh please. I've already posted two different ways this could have been  
done. Aren't you guys more creative than this? Do you not see the problem?  
Wouldn't you like to help fix it?

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (Joel Furr)
Subject: Re: leave alt.folklore.computers alone, rmgroup comp.society.folklore
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: Sat, 7 Nov 92 02:05:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov3.114417.5259@pollux.lu.se> magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson) writes:
>In article <7689@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>>In article <9211030014.AA09325@deepthought.cs.utexas.edu> FURRJK@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU (Joel Furr) writes:
>>>A group that ranks in the top 6% of all groups in terms of readership isn't
>>>suffering for lack of propagation.  Leave alt.folklore.computers alone, and do
>>>the right thing: rmgroup comp.society.folklore.  There is nothing to be gained
>>>from the course of action proposed by the poster of the CFD.
>>
>>There's only one hole in this argument: It assumes that comp.society.folklore
>>would be just an average comp group. I don't see it that way; if it's an
>>above-average alt group, it's very likely that it'll be an above-average comp
>>group as well.
>
>I agree that comp.society.folklore isn't an average comp gorup. The
>problem is that it might be non-average in the wring way. 
>
>To put it clearly: Lots of people out there (many of whom like
>alt.folklore.computers) don't like the idea of putting a talk group
>like a.f.c in the comp hierarchy. I'm not saying that they're right or
>wrong, just stating what was pretty evident from the discussion
>preceding the creation of c.s.f.

I agree.  See, for those of you who haven't bothered to read
alt.folklore.computers or are stuck with a sysadmin who refuses to carry
the "alt sewer," alt.folklore.* is a weird little hierarchy.  A lot of it
is talk and in-jokes, and that's why it belongs in alt.  I have this ugly
feeling that if alt.folklore.computers were aliased to
comp.society.folklore, your quasibigoted :) sysadmin would probably say
"ack, the alt sewer is trying to sneak in through the back door!" and yes,
REFUSE TO CARRY IT.

>
>I think one reason for the initial problems of c.s.f was that many
>admins decided not to carry it. 
>
>So, moving a.f.c to the comp hierarchy might backfire, and result in a
>*lower* propagation than it has in the alt hierarchy.
>

It'd be hard to get it a HIGHER propagation elsewhere.  It's in the top 8%
of all groups as it is.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lmollett@lunatix.uucp (Laura Mollett)
Subject: Re: "BAD" music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Lexington Public Access Unix. -KY- (606) 253-1481 
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 13:43:42 GMT

In article <ws=q+5l@lynx.unm.edu> lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) writes:
>
[snip snip]
>The actual solution to this "problem" is simple: when someone is reading a
>group they care about and sees a subject line with the letters "RFD" or
>"CFV" in it, they should *READ THE ENTIRE MESSAGE*.  The fact that it
>appears there in the first place means that it has some relevance to the
>group they're reading, and even if that relevance is minor, chances are
>that it *will* impact the content of that newsgroup in some way.  There is
>no reason to dumb down the entire net with a thousand-and- one amendments
>to the guidelines that cater to people who are too ignorant or lazy to
>properly understand how things work. 
>
>--
>Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)

As I don't read the affected group, my interest in this discussion is 
minimal to say the least.  I wouldn't be reading this at all except that I
read the rec.games.frp heirarchy and came here looking for the new group
discussion in that group.

However, people here seem to be implying that noone _ever_ posts bogus RFD
or CFV subjects in newsgroups.  In rec.games.frp.misc there was a whole
discussion about Gurps (a specific games system) that came through with a
subject line something like "RFD - Gurps System Rolls" or some such.  I don't
think this was a real RFD...I doubt it ever appeared in news.groups and I had
little to no interest in the subject.  I read the first couple of posts to
see if it had any relevance to me and didn't see any.  If suddenly this had
turned into another split discussion of rec.games.frp.misc without a change
in subject header, I, for one, would have been _very_ unhappy.  Some people
put specific games titles in their kill files.  If I had "Gurps" in my kill
file (I don't use one, so I don't know how it works) would I have missed an
RFD labeled this way?  It could actually be a valid and important question,
yes?

		Just a lurker,
				Laura Mollett


Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 08:26:21 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.205901.9251@tc.cornell.edu> riley@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Daniel S. Riley) writes:

>The CFV was posted to rec.music.synth, but the subject line declared
>that it was for the rec.music.makers reorganization--it did not
>indicate that rec.music.synth was also involved.

The very fact that the CFV was crossposted to rec.music.synth was by
definition an indication that that group was involved.

>Give the amount of
>netnews traffic, people may have skipped over the CFV as it wasn't
>obviously of interest from the subject line (I certainly did).

Now you know.

>but expecting that level of knowledge of netnews
>voting procedures from every interested reader is unrealistic.

Sure it is.  The result?  Those interested readers who don't bother to
learn the conventions of netnews will be doomed to fates like this.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: killer@robin.cs.hut.fi (Kalle Kivimaa)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 6 Nov 92 09:21:46 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, CS lab

In <1992Nov6.000935.2031@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:

>The subject lines said "CFV: rec.music.makers.* groups". There was no 
>indication of any correlation with the rec.music.synth groups. At the very
>least, a revote should be held with this one subject separate from the rest
>of the votes, with a clear and precise subject line so that ALL people
>in rec.music.synth are made aware of this. 

Let's see where that would lead:

Some assumptions:
1) The vote was held according to guidelines
2) Some r.m.s readers didn't pay attention to CFV

If we now hold a re-vote, we have a precedent that a vote held according
to guidelines is not neccesarily valid.  This implies:

1) Change the guidelines
2) Toss the guidelines and let Usenet become Altnet

If we change the guidelines, we still have the precedent AND the fact
that if some readers in an affected group do not pay attention to CFV's
(or whatever they will be called) the vote is invalid.

This would create an endless loop where a couple of people can force the rest
of the net to do things their way.


Dave, WHY is the name change such a bad idea?  Do you think that people
starting to read news do not find it, if it is under *.makers.* ?
If so, what makes you so sure that they would find it anyway?  Wouldn't
an interested reader check even such an unimportant looking subhierarchy?
Even the *Australians* can find aussie rules football under rec.sport.
football.aussie and not rec.sport.aussie-rules-football!  :-)

--
************************************************************************
* The night sky over the planet Krikkit is the least interesting sight *
* in the entire Universe.  -- Douglas Adams, HHGTG                     *
************************************************************************
Xref: sparky news.groups:20840 rec.music.synth:18082 news.admin:8412
From: fenner@postscript.cs.psu.edu (Bill Fenner)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth,news.admin
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 9 Nov 92 18:24:47 GMT
Organization: Penn State Computer Science

In article <1992Nov9.120830.28935@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
|almost NOBODY reads n.a.n even though I
|post several places "READ THE USENET DOCUMENTATION" which contains 
|copies of all the standard usenet docs (including the guidelines). 
|So much for ignorance. 

So, you're admitting that most of the people are wilfully ignorant, and have
no leg to stand on when complaining?

You provide a poor example, Dave.  You can certainly put a message in
/waffle/text/welcome saying that the newsgroup has changed names, or you
can use /alias= in /waffle/system/usenet to keep the name "rec.music.synth"
attached to "rec.music.makers.synth", or you can send email to everyone who
has rec.music.synth in their JOIN files, or any of a number of other
solutions.  Your problem is trivially solved.  Next...

  Bill
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: Was: *BAD* : VOTE ON * rec.synth *
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:16:37 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL
Keywords: Why not just * .synth * ?

According to sergei@is.morgan.com (Sergei Poliakoff):
>IMHO, referendum on the namespace structure is a bad idea  : after all,
>we don't vote DNS domain names...

True, but then DNS names are not meant for browsing, either.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
                 just another elitist Usenet administrator
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 23:36:46 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov:
>>They had their chance to vote. They blew it. Tough cookies.
>
>No way. I suspect that the wording of the subject line was enough to 
>fool them into losing concern. I'd really like to hold a revote with a
>proper subject line (what could it hurt?)...

What terrible precedent.  "We demand a revote because.. uh.. the
subject line was misleading!  Yeah, that's the ticket!"  No way ^2.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
   "I am truly as big a genius as all other Rush fans." -- Bruce Bufalini
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: CFV? What's a CFV??
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:36:12 GMT

In article <101624@bu.edu> khalid@bu-bio.bu.edu (Rasheed A. Khalid)  
writes:
> Call for votes.
> 
Here's a SPLENDID example of how someone was actually ASKING for  
information and he was given a terse reply instead of real information he  
could use.

Are you guys getting a clue yet as to how high the hurdles are to  
understanding this process?

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: mxl@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (marc.a.levy)
Subject: Moderator
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 12:49:27 GMT


What is the proper procedure for getting a new moderator for a
news group?

Marc

Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: To keep the r.m.s rename is _not_ elitist (was Re: *BAD*...)
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:26:57 GMT

In article <BxGHIE.EH0@unix.amherst.edu> ljnelson@unix.amherst.edu (Laird  
Nelson) writes:
> Dave Hayes (dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov) wrote and wrote and wrote and wrote  
and
>      wrote and wrote and wrote and wrote:
>      [...stuff deleted...]
> 
> Mr Hayes: please PLEASE *PLEASE* use "R" and not "F".  I realize you  
have a lot
> to say; I realize you value your contributions to society; I realize you  
are
> a voice of the oppressed multitudes yearning to be net.free, but oh  
*please*
> --and I speak on behalf of several r.m.(m.)s'ers--PLEASE keep the volume  
of
> tirades down to a level manageable by mere mortals.
> 
When there are several people arguing a topic from multiple vantage points  
it's pretty counter-productive to move it isolated conversations.

Perhaps all this doesn't need to be cross-posted to r.m.s though.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky news.groups:20442 rec.arts.poems:10952
From: cecilw@access.isc-br.com (Cecil Williams)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.arts.poems
Subject: Re: vote "no" on rec.arts.poems.urdu
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:52:51 GMT
Organization: ISC-Bunker Ramo, Spokane, WA


 (Peter Horn) writes:
>Has anybody ever seen a single Urdu poem in this group?
>I have not.
>So why are you making all this fuss?
>Peter

I feel a devilish mood today.
Please, allow me to offer up 
the first Urduellian inspiration...



	There once was a man from Urdu,
	who had something bad on his shoe,
	  so he went to his yard,
	  and he shuffled real hard,
	And tried to wipe off all the...


No, maybe not. 

<-:<
Cecil
Xref: sparky news.groups:20255 rec.music.synth:17691
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 4 Nov 92 23:27:44 GMT
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA

jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>If they can't be bothered to vote, no, I don't have any concern for them. As
>with the American political system, if you don't vote, don't bitch. (Re my
>.signature: yes, I voted.)
>There was overwhelming expressed support for the change. If there were that
>many folks opposed to the change, WHY DIDN'T THEY VOTE AGAINST IT??!

Most of them didn't even know a vote was going on...UNLIKE the American
political system. And the support was not overwhelming. Most of those 
yes votes were from non-participants (see below). They didn't vote FOR
it either...

Do you agree that it's unfair for a decision to be made about the name
of a newsgroup without the members of that newsgroup having a say-so?

Here are some interesting statistics I just filtered out of all this.
I culled the entire r.m.s spool file (3 weeks of r.m.s) and did some
scanning to find out (of the voters) who did and did not participate
in r.m.s (defined as a poster of course). 

 % of the Yes vote that comes from participants: 6.875
 % of the No vote that comes from participants: 23.729

It would be clear, allowing for even a 50% error in this that more of
the participants do NOT want the name change. Another interesting note:

 % of the vote that comes from participants:    11

Is this really "the best way to run USENET"? Think for a moment, and use
a standard other than the Guidelines for your answer. 

>It doesn't have to be a majority of those who use the group, for two reasons:
>1) The Guidelines aren't written that way, 

So?

>2) such a restriction would be unenforceable.

I'm not so sure that this is a justification for the action of removing
newsgroup control from the participants. Perhaps we should take some time
and figure out how to enforce such a restriction. I'm sure that many 
netters would agree.

>>I challenge that asssertion. The intent seemed to be for 
>>	rec.music.makers.<instrument>
>...and MIDI equipment and synthesizers aren't musical instruments? If not,
>then what are they? 

Those who use them do not have to be musicians (or can't you tell by today's
musical standards). They could be sound card owners, hardware designers,
or software engineers. 

Perhaps we should stop arguing. It is becoming clear to me that you worship
the Guidelines like most do the bible, and any deviation I attempt to make
for that (no matter how appropriate) is wrong in your eyes. My actions are
for the help and the health of the net...not the guidelines. 

[I think the time has come to ask the ENTIRE net what it thinks about this
state of affairs. A wide-scale crosspost may accomplish this feat, but I 
do need to think about this some more. Comments are welcome.]
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

               Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
From: emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: \*BAD\* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 10 Nov 1992 08:49:38 GMT
Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, Michigan
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.msen.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Neil Weinstock (nsw@cbnewsm.cb.att.com) wrote:
: I predict the imminent death of the net.

Photo-CD at 11.

  Edward Vielmetti, vice president for research, Msen Inc. emv@Msen.com
        Msen Inc., 628 Brooks, Ann Arbor MI  48103 +1 313 998 GLOB

Newsgroups: news.groups