HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: Re: use a KILLFILE
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 20:41:48 GMT

In article <Bvrn26.9t1@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca
(Nick Fitzpatrick) writes:
>Or even better, why do we have groups at all.  We could just use ONE channel
>(or perhaps 10, rec, sci, comp, misc  etc), and put EVERYTHING in our
>kill files.  :-)

See my news.groups RFD to abolish all news.groups in favor of one group to
be called "general" dated 1 Apr 1992.

Change the interface.  Hack the code, skip the files one does not want to
read, create a moderated news group, write FAQs.  Many of those other OSes
are dead meat, dinosaurs waiting to die.  This is a computer network.
Be computer people.

"When your tool is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail."

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Acting Associate Editor, Software and Publication Reviews
  Scientific Programming
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Seeking Books to buy:	Bongard, Pattern Recognition
			Imhof, Cartographic Relief Presentation
			Books on or by Benjamin Whorf
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: RZAA80@email.sps.mot.com (Jim Chott)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.autos.offroad
Organization: Motorola SPS
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:17:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.190307.2860@csi.uottawa.ca>, u538256@csi.uottawa.ca  (Chris Chenier) writes:
> 

> > the environmental concerns off-road driving causes.
> >      At this point, we have many choices:
> > 	-We can ask for creation of a rec.autos.offroad or such

I would like to see some type of newsgroup for 4WD vehicles, but:
I would suggest that the word "offroad" not be used so we don't add fodder
for the environmentalist types to use.  Most of us don't acutally drive
off road, but off highway on roads of some type.  This would go in with the
Tread Lightly movement the manufacturers and clubs subscribe to.

Jim
Motorola Dust Devils 4WD club
85 Toy pickup
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: fuzzy@netcom.com (Fuzzy Fox)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.archives.msdos.announce moderated and comp.archives.msdos.d
Organization: Foxes 'R' Us - Seven locations to serve you
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 23:41:14 GMT

T.D.G.Sandford@bradford.ac.uk (TDG SANDFORD) writes:

>hence cam.d (NB NOT cama.d it is a general discussion
>goup for com.archives.msdos and not just cam.a - see the title of this
>thread) (I don't think David was the one who started calling it cama.d
>so this isn't a flame, just clarification).

Hmm.  I think I WAS the one who started calling it that, and in fact,
that shows the point of confusion I have been having in this discussion.
I had thought that the proposed group was to be c.a.m.archives.d, which
I am opposed to.  However, the discussion is actually about c.a.msdos.d,
and realizing this, I now see it in a much different light.  In fact, I
would call it an agreeable proposal.

Apologies to all (esp. Mr. Jewell) for starting all of this confusion
in the first place.

-- 
#ifdef TRUE         | Fuzzy Fox                  fuzzy@netcom.com
#define  TRUE   0   | a.k.a. David DeSimone      an207@cleveland.freenet.edu
#define  FALSE  1   |   "History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes."
#endif              |                               -- Mark Twain
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.windows reorganization
Date: 14 Oct 92 18:47:02 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <1992Oct13.222846.5799@ais.com> bruce@ais.com (Bruce C. Wright) writes:
>> and pick the proper one.  I think part of the problem was the
>> LAST reorg that moved ms-windows way over to comp.os, and
>> INCREASED the confusion level of people looking to post
>> for ms-windows because the alternatives were not listed
>> anywhere near each other.
>
>This is a good point, but if you're proposing moving all of
>comp.os.ms-windows.* into a new hierarchy barely 6 months after 
>the last move, I think it has 0 probability of succeeding, and
>it will multiply the confusion a hundredfold.  The MS-Windows
>people still haven't quite brought themselves to giving up on
>the comp.windows.ms.* groups (although the usage is _finally_
>starting to decline), and there was a big political fuss about
>wanting to be in the .os hierarchy rather than a .windows or a
>.gui hierarchy.  I don't think they will agree to be moved again
>to a .gui hierarchy because my impression was that many of the
>people involved were trying to make a statement (about Windows), &
>there is no reasonable way to put X into the .os hierarchy (!!!).

I can see where it could pose a problem, especially if they
were the ones that wanted to be in comp.os.  However that
doesn't alter the fact that you're getting a lot of unwanted
ms-windows msgs in your windows group.  Perhaps you should
provide an ADDITIONAL group for ms-windows there to serve
as an outlet for these posters (who probably know nothing
about the comp.os.ms-windows group) so the x-windows crowd
won't have to be constantly complaining?

I know that we shouldn't be having groups w/ duplicate
subjects, but maybe there's a practicality consideration
here.....


		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Never speak in absolutes.  It will always lead to trouble.
From: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu (Paul Southworth)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.386bsd
Date: 9 Oct 1992 22:59:08 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan ITD Consulting and Support Services
NNTP-Posting-Host: stimpy.css.itd.umich.edu

In article <1992Oct9.135744.9993@pollux.lu.se> magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.094015.2943@aber.ac.uk> ccs@aber.ac.uk (Christopher "Jd" Samuel) writes:
>I think it should _definitely_ be somewhere in the comp.unix hierarchy,
>and _not_ under comp.os. 

>In fact, although I'd vote for comp.unix.386bsd, or comp
>unix.bsd.386bsd, I'd probably vote against comp.os.386bsd.
>Usenet is confusing enough even if we keep to the hierarchies.
>Breaking the hierarchical system will only make things worse.
>
But the point is that it is NOT breaking the hierarchies.  I don't want
to beat this issue to death since I don't see it as dividing-line in
scope, but there are currently MORE newsgroups on PC-Clone unix operating
systems (that's what "os" in comp.OS is after all) in the comp.os.*
hierarchy than there are in the comp.unix.* hierarchy.

Paul Southworth                    |     ftp redspread.css.itd.umich.edu
Consulting and Support Services    |        Anonymous Political Archives
Information Technology Division    |                     100% 386BSD 0.1
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor  |  Coming soon: mirror of ftp.eff.org

  <Representing myself.  Everything I say is for educational use only.>
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Nancy Lebovitz)
Subject: Re: RFD Alternative Medicine: misc.health.alternative
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 17:19:35 GMT

Misc.health.alternative makes sense to me. (I assume it would be better
distributed than an alt. group.) Putting the group in sci. both seems
inappropriate becathere isn't much science in alternative therapies
(this is not a comment on whether they work) and because it would lead
to lots of uninspired flaming--we've already seen plenty of that. I can't
see any reason to put the group in soc.

I prefer that the group be unmoderated--I'd rather tolerate other people's
random postings than take the chance of some of mine not being accepted.

                                   Nancy Lebovitz
                                   nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: fred_s@earwax.pei.com (Fred Scott)
Subject: Re: not everybody uses UNIX to read news
Organization: Protocol Engines Incorporated
Distribution: news
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 21:09:49 GMT

In article <7905@armltd.uucp> dseal@armltd.co.uk (David Seal) writes:
>In article <p!gp-v_@lynx.unm.edu> lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
>writes:
>
>>jfurr@vtssi.vt.edu (Joel Furr) writes:
>>
>>> Killfiles are NOT mandatory for USENET participation...
>>
>>Nevertheless, I think it's a damn sight ruder to expect an entire
>>newsgroup's worth of people to change their newsreading habits to suit one
>>person's fancy than it is to expect that one person to find better
>>newsreading software or a better site to read news on.
>
>However, it's not just to "suit one person's fancy". There are many people
>who don't have killfiles. I don't have any idea what proportion of the
>newsreading population they are, and it may well be that they are a
>sufficiently small minority that we can't expect people to take them into
>account. It may also be that they're not. In any case, if we're talking
>about courtesy, it's polite to take minorities into account...

It depends on whether you're talking about some trifling courtesy or reducing
the utility of Usenet to the lowest common denominator.  If what this
minority is asking is that we don't post so that they don't have to press
the "n" key so many times (and because they happen to have poor newsreading
software, to boot), that's absurd.

Fred
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: martin@cs.curtin.edu.au (Martin Dougiamas)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.mud.logs moderated and rec.games.mud.logs.d
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1992 02:34:16 GMT

Joel Furr <FURRJK@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU> writes:
>I would like to propose two new newsgroups in the rec.games.mud hierarchy,
>specifically, rec.games.mud.logs and rec.games.mud.logs.d.

Yes!  Great idea.
--
,--------------------------------------------------------------.      _ .
| All the deserts I could irrigate      Martin Dougiamas.      |   _r| Ll\
| All the poor I could emancipate    martin@cs.curtin.edu.au   |  |  |    \
| But that's not what interests me      Curtin University      |  \  |_   /
| I'm interested in apathy          Perth, Western Australia  -+-> x~  `-'
`=== This Is Serious, Mum ====================================='        V
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: tale@ten.uu.net (David C Lawrence)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.archives.msdos.announce moderated and comp.archives.msdos.d
Organization: UUNET Technologies, Inc.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 16:25:42 GMT

In article <BvpwHB.Gx5@uunet.uu.net> kko@sfu.ca (Samuel Ko) writes:

   Proposed group:  comp.archives.msdos.d

      This unmoderated newsgroup is the discussion subgroup of the
   moderated comp.archives.msdos.announce newsgroup.  The newsgroup
   covers users' reports, questions and discussions about the PD and
   shareware programs at the MSDOS FTP sites, and the users' questions
   about the MSDOS FTP sites such as the users' connectivity problem
   reports.  The group is also for posting requests/replies concerning
   where to find such programs as are stored at the MSDOS FTP sites.
   The newsgroup does not cover any discussions on fully commercial 
   programs or programs for other operating systems like OS/2. (These 
   programs have UseNet newsgroups of their own). 

I am opposed to this group and will vote against it unless I can be
convinced that it is somehow not redundant with comp.archives.admin,
comp.sources.wanted, comp.os.msdos.apps and comp.os.msdos.misc.  The
charter as written describes functions which are all subsumed by those
groups.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Create a killfile? AAAAAAAARGH!
Organization: Amherst College, Amherst MA
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 15:20:05 GMT

In article <N3LDsB4w164w@jwt.UUCP> bbs-jwelch@jwt.UUCP writes:

>Thanks Joel, yes people, some of us CANT use a killfile..  Some of us 
>DONT go to college and have access to a UNIX 
>system!

Sucks to be you.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / "You are just naive and repressed because
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /  penis envy is here and it's now and it's
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /  all around you." -- Neal C. Wickham
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lwv26@cas.org (Larry W. Virden)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.windows reorganization
Followup-To: news.groups
Reply-To: lvirden@cas.org (Larry W. Virden)
Organization: Nedriv Software and Shoe Shiners, Uninc.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 11:56:46 GMT

In article <384@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
:In article <BvrAIr.Ju3@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell) writes:
:> How ever you finally succeed in renaming the groups, please try to get the
:>names done in such an order that a minor system such as X-Windows is not 
:>confused with a large, well known system such as MS-Windows, to avoid more 
:>trouble in the future.
:
:I think that MSWindows should definately have it's own sub-tree, but I have
:to correct your comment about "a minor system such as X-Windows".  X is being
:used on workstations all over the place.  It may only be represented in


1. There already IS a subtree of groups for msdos windows: 
comp.os.ms-windows.* .
2. I don't know if you noticed or not, but the fellow was trying to make
a humorous point.  There are many, many, many, many, ... more msdos machines
in the world than there are all other workstations combined.  And with the
gateways between Fidonet and internet in place for usenet groups, this means
that, in theory, on usenet, the msdos folk out number the rest of us.  I
don't buy that theory myself, but that is how the argument goes.  All I
am asking is that the MS DOS folk take advantage of the large number of
MSDOS and IBM compatible usenet groups that are present and contain the
unique discussions in that realm.  I certainly have no intention of starting
a discussion of Apple II operating system and windowing concerns on a
MS-DOS group and would prefer that MSDOS or IBM compatible discussions not
be started in a Generic windowing group.  

On the other hand, if the topic to be discussed is NOT specific to MSDOS,
but merely is using MSDOS Windows or whatever as a reference point, then
the discussion falls nicely into c.w.misc or whatever we call it next.
Or if one wants to discuss porting MGR (or one of the other windowing
environments which does not yet have a home ) to a MSDOS environment (or
Apple II environment for that matter) then THAT discussion could fit
into the c.w.misc group from my stand point.

It benefits ALL involved for folk to use the relevant groups.  Certainly
questions about hardware or software for MSDOS will get better service if
they appear where the bulk of the knowlegable readers reside...
-- 
Larry W. Virden                 UUCP: osu-cis!chemabs!lvirden
Same Mbox: BITNET: lvirden@cas  INET: lvirden@cas.org
Personal: 674 Falls Place,   Reynoldsburg, OH 43068-1614
America Online: lvirden@aol.com
From: gregc@bernoulli.WPI.EDU (Gregory M Charland)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.autos.offroad
Date: 8 Oct 1992 00:24:30 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: bernoulli.wpi.edu

In article <1992Oct7.030740.7355@midway.uchicago.edu> rtp1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>Offroad driving?
>
>Just say no.

  Okay, okay.  I subscribe to the Tread Lightly movement.  Make that 
OFF-HIGHWAY driving.
  Sorry for any confusion.


-- 
     ---------------------------------------------
      Gregory M. Charland-----> gregc@wpi.wpi.edu  
     ---------------------------------------------  
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.windows reorganization
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:13:18 GMT

In article <3866@ra.nrl.navy.mil> atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Randall Atkinson) writes:
>   This is purely an unneeded gratuitous reorg Peter.  I know that you
> are fond of reorgs, but there is no reason to do this one.

Actually, I am *not* fond of reorgs. I've supported some, opposed others,
and rarely voted down the line even when I supported one. In general, I think
a reorg is only necessary if something is really broken.

Something is really broken.
-- 
Peter da Silva                                         `-_-'
Ferranti Intl. Ctls. Corp.                              'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012           "Heeft u vandaag al uw wolf geknuffeld?"
+1 713 274 5180                       "Tjener, denne ret er stadig levende."
From: rdc30@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil (Code-03 LCDR Michael E. Dobson)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.windows reorganization
Date: 9 Oct 92 19:01:58 GMT
Organization: Naval Medical Research & Development Command

In article <631@lax.lax.pe-nelson.com> twbrown@PE-Nelson.COM (Tom W. Brown) writes:

>
>Question: Should the "comp.os.ms-windows" hierarchy be moved to a
>          "comp.gui.ms-windows" hierarchy? (1/2 :-)
>
Sigh, how soon people forget.  This whole problem with MS-windows users
posting to the c.w.misc, etc groups is a direct result of the split/reorg
which moved comp.windows.msdos to comp.os.ms-windows.*  If all the new
groups had been left in comp.windows.ms.*, we likely wouldn't have this
problem.

Mike Dobson

my .sig is on loan to another newsgroup
Newsgroups: news.groups,sci.med
From: irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith)
Subject: Re: Starting an alternative medicine newsgroup
Originator: irilyth@fenris
Organization: HMC Academic Computing Services
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 03:18:41 GMT

In a prior article, Russell Turpin (turpin@cs.utexas.edu) writes:
> So informed comments such as "this gibberish displays no
> substantive thought and totally ignores known biological and
> medical facts such as ..." would be desired, as long as it isn't
> followed by "... and so it has no place in a science newsgroup"??

I think the key part of your hypothetical criticism is "such as...".
Comments along the lines of "this is unscientific gibberish" sound a lot
like unscientific gibberish--it sounds like the poster is dismissing the
opposing point of view just because it talks about alternative medicine. On
the other hand, saying "this makes no sense and here's why" demonstrates
that the critic really has some complaint with the particular therapy in
question, and isn't just venting an emotional bias against alternative
medicine in general. To use the popular astrology analogy, it's like the
difference between saying "No one with any sense could possibly believe this
astrology crap" and saying "This claim makes no sense--can you back it up?"

Note that I have no interest whatsoever in either astrology or alternative
medicine, nor do I really know the first thing about them. I just want to
differentiate between informed criticism and blind nay-saying. Many things
are stupid, but it's a lot more effective to say why they're so than to rant
about why they're so.
-- 
original text by Josh Smith    ::   Comments, questions, etc. welcomed
irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu   ::   #include <std.disclaimer>
"If you ever fall off the Sears Tower, just go real limp, because maybe you'll
look like a dummy and people will try to catch you because, hey, free dummy."
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Subject: Re: Cual es la razon?
Organization: Enea Data AB
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 00:28:34 GMT

Sergio L Aponte (sergio@Ingres.COM) writes:
>	2) El USENET esta repartido en temas, no nacinalidades. El que quiere
>	saber de futboll, puede leer el grupo de futboll y ver articulos de
>	todo el mundo.

Yes and no. National groups are not a novelty. We have a bunch of
swnet groups over here for Swedish talks, and they're quite handy.

>	3) Idioma? Nadie dice que no puedes postear en el idioma que te de la
>	gana en el grupo que te de la gana...

Well, you have by now discovered what happens if you post in another
language than English in a mainstream group. The one exception is
soc.culture.* groups where the language of the country is usually
permitted. You might get away with in it sci.lang as well, but that
is as far you get. We had an incredible flame war on this issue in
the eunet groups some years ago. You could at least expect that 
Europeans would be more tolerant to non-English postings, but no.

>	4) Tambien existe la possibilidad de controlar tu distribuicion, para
>	que articulos de interest nacinal sean distribuidos en esa nacion
>	solamente, aunque a mi me encanta ver articulos de todo el muno.

Well, this doesn't really work, since the distribution is not
constrained to the country proper. For instance in Sweden we
have swnet.politik. Sure, we could launch all these discussions
in talk.politics.misc and put distribution swnet on all articles.
But the articles would nevertheless come to readers who don't
understand Swedish and be mad with us. And we would have to dig
through all the other crap in t.p.m to find our Swedish threads.

>	Mi punto es : my newsrc reporta alrededor de 1900 newsgroups genericos.
>	Si ahora Chile quiere esos 1900 temas pero en "chile.", depues panama
>	quiere esos 1900 temas en "panama.", china en "china.", etc... Donde
>	vamos a llegar?

Are they really planning to copy all mainstream Usenet groups in a
local national group? Doesn't seem realistically to me. But it
might be handy to have a few for local items like jobs, things
for sale etc.

As for your over-large .newsrc that is really a fault of news
and rn which forces you to have groups you are not interested
in in your .newsrc, but "fgrep -v '!'" will remove all you do
not subscribe. (But much annoyingly rn will sooner or later ask
you to subscribe to those groups which never have received any
articles.)
-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
There are many sorts of Macedonians: Greek, Bulgarian, Roumanian, Macedonian...

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org (Wolfgang Zenker)
Subject: Re: NAPLPS Newsgroup
Organization: none
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 03:45:06 GMT

How about a comp.dcom.videotex for all the videotex-standards
and applications worldwide (NAPLPS, CEPT, PRESTEL, ANTIOPE,
CAPTAIN) ?

Wolfgang
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.mecha
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: Thu, 15 Oct 92 23:53:22 GMT

In article <451@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) wri
es:
>If you reread the proposal you will find that frp-type games are only
>part of what the ngroup is intended to support.  the "mecha" genre
>covers a lot of ground.  even if there isn't a problem in rec.games.frp.
isc
>for the role-playing mecha games, where should I be talking about
>mechwarrior? mekton? or some of the other things that rec.games.mecha
>is supposed to cover?
>
>q: (after just suggesting someone reread the proposal, I'm going to
>weasle out by asking...)  should the btech novels be covered in this
>group as well?  if so, should we try to bump it up to rec.mecha (or
>is that going a bit to far....?)
>
>
>		-Richard Hartman
>		hartman@ulogic.COM
>
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-=
>"Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?"


Hmmm, rec.mecha would allow the discussion of mecha-related novels, 
TV shows, etc.  Might be a good idea at that...
 

--
---Chris Meadows  CHM173S@SMSVMA or CMEADOWS@NYX.CS.DU.EDU
        "Wish in one hand and do something else in the other, then 
          squeeze them both and see which one comes true."
                    ---Corwin, NINE PRINCES IN AMBER by Roger Zelazny
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: salraki@navaho.eel.ufl.edu (Scott Alazraki)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.autos.offroad
Reply-To: edo@ugrad.ee.ufl.edu
Organization: UF EE Department (Graduate Student)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 21:56:42 GMT

I too would be interested in a group such as this.

Scott
Newsgroups: news.groups