HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nrc@cbnews.cb.att.com (N. Richard Caldwell)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: The rec.arts.{comics.}manga wars continue
Date: 9 Apr 92 19:44:16 GMT
Organization: AT&T Network Systems  -  Columbus, Ohio

From article <1992Apr9.185836.29853@wdl.loral.com>, by dcb@wdl1.wdl.loral.com (David C Blume):
> 
> Good point.  The group for the discussion of western comics should be
> on the same level as the group for the discussion of asian comics.  Currently
> the group for the discussion of western comics is rec.arts.comics.  That
> can change, and if so, we'd be happy to move the proposed rec.arts.manga
> too.

When did r.a.comics become restricted to only western comics?  Is this
a real division (one included in the charter) or one that has arisen only 
because the fans of some comic genre (e.g. "manga") don't want to discuss 
their interest in the general comics forum.  If rec.arts.comics,
really is restricted to "western" comics then it is misnamed and
you're suggesting that misnaming another group will solve the
problem.  


"Don't drive too slowly."                 Richard Caldwell
                                          AT&T Network Systems
                                          att!cbnews!nrc
                                          nrc@cbnews.att.com
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: [flame] On those who run newgroup votes
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 03:28:41 GMT

In article <6367@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>You're effectively trying to do away with the use of vote counting software.

No, just gratuitous restrictions. For example, having to send a vote to
"vote-yes" AND have a certain string in it.

Certainly it should be possible to vote YES or NO to any proposal by
simply replying to the message and (say) editing out all but one line,
or just changing the address.

There have been recent votes where that won't work.
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
6 T (Have you hugged your wolf today?)468 20 S 9 T (Taronga Park BBS)24 35 S 10
/Courier F(`-_-')488 40 S ( 'U` )488 30 S 6 T (+1 713 568 0480 2400/n/8/1)24 27
S (+1 713 568 1032 Trailblazer)24 20 S 12 T (Peter da Silva)24 45 S showpage
From: JLM@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: straw poll: Alok bozo or not?
Date: 16 Apr 92 06:36:00 GMT
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

In article <4118@crl.LABS.TEK.COM>, scott@ferrari.LABS.TEK.COM (Scott
Huddleston) says:
>
>Alok recently proposed to run a straw poll on whether or not SCIA should
>get a revote.  Don't ask me why, since he's already vetoed the idea and
>he knows he gets a veto.
>
>Anyway, Alok is repeating a classic straw poll mistake.  He left out the
>most important choice:
>
>3.  Alok is a bozo who has destroyed whatever credibility he might once
>have had, and his continued involvement in SCIA group matters is useless
>at best, and counterproductive at worst.  If he had a clue he'd desist
>and keep quiet, but he has turned down many offers of a clue.
>
>Therefore, I'm now running a meta straw poll on the question,
>"Is Alok a bozo or not?".  This straw poll is probably just as pointless
>as Alok's, but at least it's more fun.  Send your votes to either
>
>   bozo-yes@ferrari.labs.tek.com
>          or
>   bozo-no@ferrari.labs.tek.com



 In the Alok tradition I'd like to encourage all of you to vote
often and to ask all your friends to let you use their accounts. :-) :-)
From: gabe@angus.mi.org (B. Gabriel Helou)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: The rec.arts.{comics.}manga wars continue
Date: 13 Apr 92 21:01:50 GMT
Organization: North Star BBS

axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain Sinclair) writes:

> smith@ctron.com (Larry Smith) writes:
>  >All anyone is asking is that you follow the bloody conventions, if
> 
> We are.  Manga is a recreational art which doesn't belong under *.comics.

A recreational art?  Perhaps my information on the subject is way out of 
date, but would someone please inform me

    -   How manga differs from comics (other than being b/w and 
        predominantly adult subject matter)
        
    -   What makes it a "recreational art".

---- -- -  -    -       -          -          -              -            
Gabe Helou         | "Contrariwise", continued Tweedledee, "If it was so,
gabe@angus.mi.org  | it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as
Troy, MI           | it isn't, it ain't. That's logic."  -- Lewis Carroll
---- -- -  -    -       -          -          -              -        <EOR>
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.indian.american,soc.culture.indian
From: alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia)
Subject: Re: RFD2: SCIA (The new CFV... is it needed ?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 00:08:55 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups

In article <92098.093348JLM@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, JLM@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU writes:
> In article <1992Apr6.204406.26298@cbnewsi.cb.att.com>, alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com
> (alok.vijayvargia) says:
> >
> >How can there be a CFV because there is no consensus whether a CFV is
> >needed  as a result of this new RFD (which by the way is a violation
> >as explained in my previous post) ?
> >
> >Disgusted,
> >
> >Alok
> 
> 
>  The RFD was submitted on Feb 27; when S.C.I.A was finally
> chosen by 48% of those participating in the discussion/poll
> (INCLUDING YOURSELF) as the name that would appear on the CFV

> So as you can see, this RFD has now been running 41 days ! Longer
> than any other RFD ! So stop moaning and complaining; I'm starting
> to get fed up with you !!

Your original RFD was for soc.culture.asian.american.indians.
During this RFD you discovered after a straw poll that people
didn't like that name and chose the name SCIA over it.

NOw the problem is that there already has been an RFD for SCIA.
Six months should have expired before issuing a new RFD for SCIA.
Six months will expire on April 19, 1992.

If you want to continue your crusade, you must post an RFD for SCIA
after that. Call it RFD3:SCIA, and I will not object.

The period allowed must be 30 days. It is in this period that there must
be a discussion whether a CFV should be posted because of 
any problems , perceived or actual in the past vote.

If people decide that yes indeed a new CFV is needed, then only a new
vote should be carried out.

That is the right way to do without violating the guidelines.

Alok

> 

>  Had you done things right in the first place, there would not be
> a need for us to try to clean up the mess you created. I have tried

Mess has been created by you and few posters from soc.culture.indian
who  have their own personal reasons to oppose the previous vote.

> to be patient with you and tried to accomodate you as much as possible,

Nonsense. All I have seen from you is accusations and demagoguery.

> but now I see you are just grasping at straws, making a futile and
> infantile attempt to cast doubts on the integrity of this vote.

I am not opposed to a revote as much as posting of this RFD at this time
and its period.
Also I like to have the netusers decide whether a revote is required,
not one person (Mr. Lawrence) or a few (group-advice) who I 
don't even know the identity of.

I am even willing to conduct a quick straw poll to ask the net users
what they think. If the net users want a revote with a 2/3 majority
over those who don't want a revote, then I will agree to a revote.

> I am fed up with this s##t !

Then get out of the kitchen !

>  The CFV will be posted.

That is if the net.gods want to violate the guidelines ...

> Jose L. Martinez

Alok Vijayvargia

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: soc.personals.ads. etc....
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 22:19:17 GMT

twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:

>So if you're doing that, why split the groups?  If you can be assured
>that every message posted to soc.personals.ads will have the proper
>subject line format, there is no extra utility gained in splitting
>into msm, etc.  People who don't want to see some particular subset of
>those posts can easily add the appropriate patterns to their KILL
>files.

Not ALL usenet sites have kill file capability. This is why I am splitting
the groups. (Otherwise why risk flames from the gay community?)
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov           ames!elroy!dxh

   The foolish reject what they see, not what they think;
	     The wise reject what they think, not what they see...
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.amiga.audio,comp.sys.amiga.graphics
From: scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga
Organization: Industrial Technology Institute
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 19:21:10 GMT

thwang@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Tommy Hwang) writes:

>In article <1992Apr9.140318.2772@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> wald@theory.lcs.mit.edu (David Wald) writes:

>>>     However late, okay, but I will cross post AS IS.  No "MANGA" warning
>>>in headers.
>>
>>You're advocating deliberate rudeness.  Not in posting to

>     It will have the "Standarized header" as stated.  I just do not
>think that the "Mangas" should all be combined into one subject.
>the headers WILL be based on the intended subject (ie. the title
>of the books, or the name of its creater, etc...).  This is not
>rudeness, I personally feel it is Fairness.  ne?

You misunderstand.  Recently in rec.arts.comics folks have started
adding a recognizable keyword to the Subject: line, eg, STRIPS,
XMEN, PEOPLE, etc.  The subject line then continues as normal with
the description.  It's a real convenience for all concerned.  Your
original description certianly seems to advocate rudeness.
-- 
 "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and taste
  good with ketchup."  seen on a button, author unknown
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: mss2@quads.uchicago.edu (Michael S. Schiffer)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga
Reply-To: mss2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 17:50:14 GMT

Well, I'm probably not going to make any friends with this, but
here goes.

1) It seems clear to me that manga are a subset of comics.  If someone
who had never heard of manga needed an explanation of what they
were, the answer would be comics of such and such a genre produced
primarily but not exclusively in Japan.

2) However, it's also true that anime is a subset of movies.  Yet
we have rec.arts.anime, not rec.arts.movies.anime, despite
the existence of an entire rec.arts.movies hierarchy.

3) It's eminently clear that the people who are interested in
the subject of manga do not, for reasons which are unclear
to me, wish to be in the r.a.c hierarchy.  Fine.  No one who
knows what manga are will be confused, no one who doesn't
will care.

Finally, I do _not_ understand the vehemence that these bloody
newsgroup naming/split issues generate.  You'd think that 
we were discussing the naming or splitting of one's own
child!  I've seen more bile and flamage on the subjects
of splitting the frp and certain other groups and on the
naming of groups relating to manga and (Asian) Indian-American
culture than I've seen on anything short of the Turk-Armenian
wars which rage across soc.history, talk.politics.soviet, etc
ad nauseum.  It's _just_ a _name_, people!  No lives at stake,
no livelihoods, no liberties.  Nomenclature and directory
structures in the /news directory, that's all.  Will _someone_
please tell me why it's worth all the storm and strife?

Mike

-- 
Michael S. Schiffer, LHN, FCS	"Never let your sense of morality prevent
mss2@midway.uchicago.edu	 you from doing what's right!"
mike.schiffer@um.cc.umich.edu	 --Mayor Salvor Hardin of Terminus
mss2@usite-next.uchicago.edu     Isaac Asimov, _Foundation_
Xref: sparky news.groups:10300 misc.jobs.misc:3503
From: rem@btr.BTR.COM (Robert E. Maas  rem@btr.com)
Newsgroups: news.groups,misc.jobs.misc
Subject: Re: RFD:  misc.jobs.offered reorganization
Date: 14 Apr 92 10:06:21 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, MtnView CA. Contact: Customer Service cs@BTR.COM

In addition to the reasons I expressed before for opposing the split
(discrepancy between name which is ...entrylevel and purpose which is
"fresh college graduates", and possibility many hosts won't receive the new
newsgroups for weeks or months causing us jobseekers great pain), I agree with
the person who said that employers are already going out of their way to
post to Usenet at all and the burden of having to decide which of several
newgroups to post to could very well make them just give up totally.
I prefer sticking to one newsgroup for all regular employment openings
and encouraging employers to include code words in the Subject: field which
indicate entry level or number years experience in critical areas.
If an employer doesn't use all the proper code words, it only makes things
a teensy bit harder for jobseekers. That's a lot better than having the ad
posted to the wrong newsgroup or not posted at all.
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.amiga.audio,comp.sys.amiga.graphics
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.bbs.misc
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:55:44 GMT
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA

gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...) writes:
>Request For Discussion (RFD): comp.bbs.misc
>This is an official Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
>Usenet newsgroup to take the role currently held by alt.bbs.

I like it.  It's about time alt.bbs went official.
-- 
I'm pink, therefore I'm spam
From: limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli +1 908 754 1082)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.cadence
Date: 6 Apr 92 23:13:54 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Bjorn.B.Larsen@delab.sintef.no (Bjorn B. Larsen) writes:

>I shall not propose this now, but I will suggest that the name for this
>specific group is kept as
>  comp.sys.cadence.

Ack!  comp.sys is for computer systems, not software systems.  Mentor
historically has sold their own computer systems and therefore the
userbase requested comp.sys.mentor be the name.

If the group is to be created at all (read below) should be under comp.lsi.cad
or comp.cad

>There is, however, another question that bothers me: Will there be
>enough traffic to justify this creation? There are only a few cadence
>related posts on comp.lsi.cad, and hardly any on the two mailing lists
>(according to the RFD).

I am completely in favor of creating a newsgroup when a mailing list
overflows.  In fact, in the past I have advocated that special rules be
adopted that bypass voting if a mailing list has grown beyond the
capacity of what a mailing list should handle as far as volume.
However, if there is next to no traffic about Cadence on BOTH mailing
lists as well as the current lsi newsgroup, then this new newsgroup
really shouldn't be created.

The current newsgroups on the topic do not have much traffic.  Why
create another newsgroup?

Tom
-- 
Tom Limoncelli -- limonce@pilot.njin.net
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: conty@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Conty)
Subject: Re: Some comments on this rec.arts.{whatever}.manga
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 03:38:07 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.211805.22184@wdl.loral.com>, dcb@wdl1.wdl.loral.com (David C Blume) writes:
> conty@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Conty) writes:
> >It's more than enough for asian comics to have their own newsgroup.
> 
> That can be read as having an ugly tone.  Hope you didn't imply that.
> It's "more than enough" for there to exist almost any rec* group.  I
> believe there is sufficient demand for some sort of *manga group, IMHO.

That's what I meant.  My fingers tend to be faster than my brain... :-)

-- 
			    E n r i q u e  C o n t y
			      jester@ihlpl.att.com
		   Disclaimer:  You're not dealing with AT&T.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: frnk@cs1.bradley.edu (Paul Ondercin)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.music.enya
Organization: Bradley University
Date:  9 Apr 92 15:43:43 GMT


   I'm not making a mailing list because I don't have the time. 

   And what is the big deal about new groups? This group would only rate about
20 posts a day, so it wouldn't cause a huge amount of traffic. You make it soun
like each group is a massive load that has to be supported by someone. A  new
group wouldn't necessarially raise net traffic, just redirect it. 

   	 Frnk! :>
--
_____________________________________________________________________________.
!________Paul Ondercin, owner of "THE MACHINE", a 486 of epic power!__________!
|frnk@bucs1.bradley.edu   frnk@buhub.bradley.edu   frnk@camelot.bradley.edu   |
|frnk@cssun1.bradley.edu  frnk@cssun2.bradley.edu  am417@cleveland.freenet.Edu| 
!_________ponder@heartland.bradley.edu_____________ae198@yfn.ysu.edu__________!
!___Frnkfrnkfrnkfrnkfrnk!!!___|_Just a little penguin that can only say Frnk!_!
!_*YOU* think you've got problems?_Ever worry about being eaten by a walrus?__!
From: alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: ACK1 - Straw Poll: SCIA Revote or Not ?
Date: 15 Apr 92 22:04:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T


Following votes have been received so far:

From: betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz)
From: anand@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Anand Praturi)
From: mda46419@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (StarWatcher)
From: srp@eecs.umich.edu
From: brunner@kazoo.ssd.loral.com (Brian Brunner)
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
From: DSTURM@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU (David Sturm)
From: sunder@Athena.MIT.EDU (Sankar Sunder)
From: uunet!mailrus!gatech!cc!gukal (Sreenivas Gokul)
From: Christopher Davis <ckd@eff.org>
From: sunder@bach.crhc.uiuc.edu (Srinivas Sunder)
From: Steve Simmons <scs@wotan.iti.org>
From: chitta@cs.ep.utexas.EDU (C Baral)
From: Mark McKinzie <mckinzie@math.wisc.edu>
From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)


Alok
att!probe!alok
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RESULT: misc.activism.{progressive.d,misc} fail {57: 26,52:31}
From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 13 Apr 92 19:29:14 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc.

In <1992Apr13.181307.16316@uunet.uu.net> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:

>The voting period for the groups misc.activism.{progressive.d,misc} has ended.
>Both proposals failed to achieve the necessary margin of 100 more YES votes
>than NO votes; therefore, both proposals have failed. Neither proposal even
>got 100 total votes, in fact...here are the results:

>Proposal 1: 57 to 26...margin 31, percent in favor 68.674699
>Proposal 2: 52 to 31...margin 21, percent in favor 62.650602

So a vote to unmoderate misc.activism.progressive is in order?   :-)


--
Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
Ich bin ein Virus.  Mach' mit und kopiere mich in Deine .signature.
From: michael@resonex.com (Michael Bryan)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.jobs.offered reorganization
Date: 13 Apr 92 22:38:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: resonex.1992Apr13.223852.9986
Organization: Resonex Inc., Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Apr13.220324.12069@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz> mmt@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Mark Thomson) writes:
>However if the consensus is to split .offered into .entry and .expert, I still
>would not favour a .recruit group. Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't
>see why the involvement of an agency affects whether a job is worth looking
>at.

As someone who recently went through a recruiting firm, let me say it can
be a big difference!  [Warning: my experiences with recruiting agencies
are rather negative, although I'm certain others have had better luck than
I have.  Adjust your opinions of my following opinions accordingly.]

For starters, most recruiting firms are paid a hefty fee for finding
you, often 20-30% of a year's salary.  Although some companies give
lip service to the idea that this won't affect what salary you are
paid, the sad reality is that it often does matter.  For instance, if
there are two equally qualified candidates for a job, both asking for
the same salary, one from a recruiter, one not, the one coming in
directly is likely to get offered the job first.  Other negatives are
that recruiters often don't have a full technical background, and just
key off buzzwords in looking for job matches.  This can result in a
long period of training a recruiter what it is that you would consider
a good fit.

To balance the scales, there are also benefits to using a recruiter.
You can get wider exposure for less effort, and theoretically have
likely mismatches screened before you waste your time interviewing at
a company.  It all depends on what your looking for.

I think these differences are important enough to warrant the separation
of recruitment postings into a group of their own.

>BTW, even if such a group were formed, I'm not sure that ".recruit" is
>such a great name. In this part of the world, the term recruiter does not
>necessarily connote an employment agency.

In another posting, I suggested a slight change, to ".recruiter", but
that's the best I can come up with.  I admit to being rather ignorant of
appropriate words in other countries, however.  Any further suggestions?

-- 
Michael Bryan	        michael@resonex.com
"This isn't an argument, you're just contradicting me!"  "No I'm not."
From: imcc@cs.strath.ac.uk (Iain McCord)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: soc.personals.ads.{male,female}.{seeking-male,seeking-female}
Date: 7 Apr 92 16:33:43 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. Dept., Strathclyde Univ., Scotland.

dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
> How's that for a loophole? 

I think you've missed the point.  It's not that biasing the creation process
to make it all or nothing won't work.  It's that the propogation of the four
seperate groups could, and probably would, vary.

		~~~~~/\~~~~~
Iain McCord	~~~~/()\~~~~	Tue Apr  7 17:33:41 WET DST 1992
		~~~~~~~~~~~~
Xref: sparky news.groups:9935 news.admin:3510