HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: charles@leland.Stanford.EDU (Charles Benjamin Roosen)
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.best-of.usenet moderated, misc.best-of.usenet.d
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 18:38:14 GMT

In article <BuMop4.39u@uunet.uu.net>, ziegast@uunet.UU.NET (Eric Ziegast) writes:
|> This is a request for discussion regarding creation of two newsgroups for
|> the submission and discussion of articles that the posters consider as
|> the "best" articles found on USENET.  A similar unmoderated newsgroup,

|> The moderator's primary purpose should be to filter out articles inappropri-
|> ate for the newsgroup.  Inapproprite is limited to:
|> 
|> 	- Articles not following the guidelines set above.
|> 	- Cross-postings from other groups.
|> 	- Followups to posted articles (redirected to misc.best-of.usenet.d).

The moderator should only filter articles based on these criterion. 

|> 	- Articles better served by other more appropriate moderated newsgroups.
|> 	  For example, a humorous submission that origionally appeared in
|> 	  rec.humor is better served by rec.humor.funny.
|> 	- (Optional, to be discussed)  Articles of poor taste or net ettiquite.

Unless there have been problems in the past which I am not aware of, I see no 
reason for the moderator to be in the position of making any judgement calls on 
the appropriateness or quality of material.  

Charles Roosen
charles@playfair.stanford.edu
From: miller@FS1.cam.nist.gov (Bruce R. Miller)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.autos.antique
Date: 10 Sep 92 22:53:20 GMT
Organization: NIST - Computing and Applied Mathematics Laboratory


In article <1992Sep9.191502.25405@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com>, Sharen A. Rund writes:
> In article <Bu7tHM.9AF@uunet.uu.net> lisbon@vpnet.chi.il.us (Gerry Swetsky) writes:
> >Rec.autos.antique shall NOT be for the discussion for the non-stock
> >modification, customization or souping up of antique autos.

Well, this already is different from the apparent charter a.a.a has been
running under.  This charter would apparently forbid any discussion of,
for example, 6-12 volt conversions which have already been discussed.

> but - I was under the impression, at that time, that all areas of
> antique cars, e.g., rods & customs, would be included - now, by your
> statements in this posting, only "purists" topics will be allowed -

Although there was originally some speculation about a catch-all group
covering antiques, hotrods & customs, there never was a good name, and
too much cage rattling by purists of various breeds.

I think the subject of modification is something that does need to be
clarified, though.  Restricting to _NO_ modification is, to me,
ridiculous.   

Allowing discussion of customization, I dont  know, but I dont see  that
much harm in it.  I  cant imagine that people  are going to have  such a
heartwrenching time skipping past 100's of articles each day about rape,
incest and whatever. There's unlikely to be that much is there?  And you
might even learn something!  Seems to me, body customization is just body
work.  You've got a flat piece of metal and you want  it to look like
that  picture (in the  book or in  your head, depending  on
whether you are restoring or customizing).

As a side note, I understand there's rumbling about to create a
rec.autos.hotrod.  If I got it right, though, it will be restricted to
_performance_ modification --- doesn't matter what it looks like.

Seems a shame for the customizers to be squeezed out of the middle,
just for the sake of ethnic purity.   IMHO, there's more overlap here
than there, though.
From: bruce@supr.scm.liv.ac.uk (Bruce Stephens)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.religion.friends
Date: 15 Sep 92 13:49:30 GMT
	<BuDLKM.48E@unix.amherst.edu> <*9@byu.edu>
Organization: Centre for Mathematical Software Research, Univ. Liverpool, UK

> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:

>>>Maybe soc.religion.quakers would be better.
>> I thought the same thing, at first, but it occurred to me that since
>> I'm not a Quaker, I have very little perspective on the naming
>> question here.  Perhaps it is more common among Quakers to refer to
>> themselves as in the Society of Friends.  In that case,
>> "soc.religion.quakers" would be less appropriate, and
>> "soc.religion.friends" would be instantly recognizable to anyone In
>> The Know.

I don't know what the situation is outside the UK, but here either is
acceptable.  The Quakers that I've met recently have described
themselves as Quakers, not Friends, but perhaps that's because they
didn't realise that I was "In The Know".

I don't think so, though, when I regularly attended meetings I
described myself as a Quaker, not a Friend.

In any case, neither is an insult to (at least British) Quakers, and
either is immediately recognisable to Quakers, so the only question is
(IMHO) which is better for non-Quakers, and I suspect
soc.religion.quakers would be better.
--
Bruce   (a lapsed Quaker)
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: mayne@phi.cs.fsu.edu (William Mayne)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.scouting.activities, rec.scouting.policy
Reply-To: mayne@cs.fsu.edu
Organization: Florida State University Computer Science Department
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 18:48:53 GMT

The attempt to split rec.scouting is nothing but the attempt of
reactionaries to have a group free from anti-discrimination
viewpoints which they do not wish to see. It is pure hypocricy
and unless the non-policy group is moderated it will not accomplish
its desired anti-free speech pro-discrimination purpose. I will
vote against it in any case just like I would vote against alt.kkk.

I understand that those who favor the BSA's practice of discrimination
are tired of hearing arguments against it. I'm sure the White Citizen's
Council of Montgomery got tired of hearing from Dr. Martin Luther King,
Jr. and the "outside agitators" who supported ending discrimination
in public transportation back in the 1950s.

"Policy" in this argument is just a code word for discrimination against
gays and atheists, as I think any honest reader of rec.scouting,
regardless or his or her position on this, will concede. At present with
one unmoderated forum those who wish to discuss "program" are free to do
so. Having a separate group is not necessary.

Bill Mayne
From: naraht@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu (Randolph J. Finder)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: RFD: rec.humor.informix
Date: 14 Sep 92 18:44:41 -0500
Organization: Carnegie Mellon Computer Club

RFD: rec.humor.informix

We have rec.humor.oracle, why not give equal time to jokes about
its competition in the non-micro computer database market.

I mean if we have jokes about how many oracle servers it takes to screw
in a light bulb, why can't we have jokes about how do you fit 15 informix
products into a VW hard disk.



:-) 
(Yes I know what rec.humor.oracle is for)
-- 
(naraht@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu)	| Leadership,Friendship, and Service
(vri_rjfin@dmis.ha.osd.mil)	|          Alpha Phi Omega
(tnc!m0039@uunet.uu.net)	| National (Co-ed) Service Fraternity
"Service to others is the rent that we pay for living on the planet"(quote?)
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: charles@leland.Stanford.EDU (Charles Benjamin Roosen)
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.best-of.usenet moderated, misc.best-of.usenet.d
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 22:51:54 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.205750.14477@ils.nwu.edu>, lynch@ils.nwu.edu (Richard Lynch) writes:

|> 
|> I seriously believe that the moderator should only reject the articles that are
|> cross-posted, followups, and originals.  The former two could presumably be
|> programmed automagically by a unix guru, and the latter might even be possible
|> if a standard submission of headers and original headers that was not too
|> cumbersome for posters.

My only problem with the current group (which I think is the only issue that
prompted this RFD) is that I get tired of followups accidentally getting into
aboi due to crosspostings.  Having code to prohibit followups would be far
preferable to having a human moderator IMHO.

Charles
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Subject: Re: Improprieties (soc.culture.tamil ...
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 00:54:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.222221.22121@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia) writes:
>In article <7331@lib.tmc.edu>, jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>> Exactly correct, so long as the vote taker makes no appeals while the vote is
>> in progress. He can do anything his little old heart desires, as long as he
>> does it before the CFV.
>
>I simply disagree. A vote taker making such comments even before
>voting starts, is acting improperly.

You are simply wrong. Anyone is free to comments on an RFD prior to a
vote, even the vote taker. The vote taker has no special status until
there are votes to be taken.

>I would not trust such a vote taker.

Tough.

Your lack of trust is not proof of impropriety. The vote taker refusing
to obey your demands is not proof of impropriety.

When you have proof of improper action on the part of a vote taker,
present it here. Until then, stop making unsubstantiated claims based
on whom you trust or don't trust. Your lack of trust and 75 cents can
buy you a cup of coffee.

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.sun.sunnet.manager
Organization: Industrial Technology Institute
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 15:06:11 GMT

rlg@desktalk.com (Richard L. Gralnik) writes:

>Proposed Newsgroup:  comp.sys.sun.sunnet.manager (open to discussion of course)

Volume on this topic in the various sun.* and *admin* newsgroups seems
to be minimal at best.  I see no need for a newsgroup.  Have you tried
setting up a mailing list?
-- 
Steve: #1 of human beings on the Zwicky list
From: taia_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.rpg.board
Date: 16 Sep 92 13:46:37 NZST
Organization: Welligton City Council, Public Access.
NNTP-Posting-Host: kosmos.wcc.govt.nz

In article <1992Sep15.213612.22660@tdb.uu.se>, m91kgh@tdb.uu.se (Karl-Gunnar Hultland) writes:
> philipd@cs.kuleuven.ac.be (Philip Dutre) writes:
> : In article <BuL4M4.GoF@uunet.uu.net>, lib1p@rosie.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino) writes:
> : There are no games containing both elements of boardgames & roleplaying games.

> The volume might not be that great and it isn't evenly distributed but
> if you look in rec.games.board you can find a large number of
> battletech postings certainly more than in some other existing groups.
> I would therefore like to purpose a group called
> rec.games.btech or rec.games.battletech where you can discuss BOTH the
> rpg and the boardgame.
> Karl-Gunnar  m91kgh@bellatrix.tdb.uu.se

 Actually Battletech posts are found in rec.games.frp.misc and on
rec.games.board. Due to the large number of posts on r.g.board, it
has been suggested that a group be made. Doubling with Warhammer 40k
should not be a severe hardship, so being named rec.games.frp.board
is appropriate.

This has been....
 Tony Taia
  TAIA_A@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz, tai-shu@kauri.vuw.ac.nz
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jws@billy.mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.autos.antique
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:32:54 GMT
Organization: Harris Semiconductor, Melbourne FL

In article <1992Sep9.230203.20814@julian.uwo.ca> wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith) writes:
>
>Combining these two groups of discussions (people discussing ordinary,
>stock factory 30's to late 60's cars and people discussing doing freaky
>things to them) are as different as *.msdos and *.unix, and belong
>in different groups.
>
>I don't want to sift through how to chop your 40's coupe, and put radial
>tires on it, and a blower.  If you're so interested in it, and there's
>enough of you out there, at least create alt.rape.your.car        
>(or alt.autos.hot-rodding).  God, isin't there enough commercial
>publications/magazines that cover that kind of thing?
>
 Magazines are one-way. Why don't all a.a.a. readers simply leave and read
restoration mags? Because the interaction is where the value is. However
prized your religious convictions may be to you, it's a pity that tolerance
is not among them. With a.a.a. running about 5-10 messages a day, I think
there's room for more subject areas without unduly taxing your 'n' key.
Maybe the dude who chopped the '40s coupe has a clean windshield laying
around which you'll never get to pick up cheap for -yours-. Maybe said
dude has expertise in other related areas to share but, by virtue of being
judged Impure, will be hounded out of the group instead. How exactly does
this help us? By having to hit 'n' one less time? 

 There is ongoing discussion elsewhere about forming a hotrod group to
parallel the mailing list. This is fine. But even  if you consider antiques
and hotrods to be orthogonal dimensions there is still the place where
the two intersect, and that happens to be home for a lot of us. The blown
'40s coupe owner may ask about the engine there and panel beating here.
However I for one will not have a crisis of faith if the wrong word is
mentioned in the wrong group. I read them both anyhow. 
-- 
##########################################################################
#Irresponsible rantings of the author alone. Any resemblance to persons  #
#living or dead then yer bummin. May cause drowsiness. Alcohol may inten-#
#sify this effect. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Billy!#
From: JLM@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.frp.board (was Re: RFD: rec.games.rpg.board)
Date: 15 Sep 92 20:59:54 GMT
 <1992Sep14.203503.15857@zip.eecs.umich.edu> <14SEP199220010348@rosie.uh.edu>
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

In article <14SEP199220010348@rosie.uh.edu>, lib1p@rosie.uh.edu (Tammy Stark
Blandino) says:
>
>In article <1992Sep14.203503.15857@zip.eecs.umich.edu>,
>boyd@colonial.eecs.umich.edu (Eric Boyd) writes...
>>
>>Therefore, I propose changing the proposed name as follows:
>>
>>REC.GAMES.FRP.BOARD
>>
>
>Agreed.  Unless there are objections (which I doubt) I will change
>the RFD to rec.games.frp.board
>
>Tammy
>lib1p@jetson.uh.edu


 The proposed rec.games.frp.board duplicates at least
two other existing newsgroups.

 Hence, I can find no justification for the creation
of this group at this time. If something were to happen
to the other groups, then maybe, but not now.

-- Jose L. Martinez --
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: kreme@nyx.cs.du.edu (Not A Random Name)
Subject: Re: rec.games.abstract
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 19:30:13 GMT

karttu@mits.mdata.fi (Antti Karttunen) writes:

>In article <185bscINNr57@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> fau@po.CWRU.Edu (Francis A. Uy) writes:
>>
>>Calling all names, please.

>What about rec.games.board.proprietary and .nonproprietary (or .pd)?
>Now, don't take this seriously, but I just realized that these names
>divide the interests quite well.
>Fortunately, the inventors of Go and Chatur-anga didn't make their
>games proprietary. ;-)

>(Really: I favor keeping rec.games.board as it it, and creating
>rec.games.[board.]abstract for the games currently discussed.)

Well, I think the heirarchy should go something like this:

	rec.games.board (current group, limited to BOARD games)
	rec.games.computer (Any computer games, NOT home video games)
	rec.games.misc (Everything else)

Now the problem is moving all the computer traffic out of misc, and
defining what a board game is.  What I would say is that a board game
is something along the lines of Monopoly or Clue, but not Chess or Go
or checkers, those go in misc with Pente and Othello and other
"abstract" games.

Then the trouble is a game like "Scrabble" or "Trivial Pursuit."  I
would put them in board, others would put them in misc.  I don't see
anyway to avoid that except to just make a decision.

NOTE:  Home video games go in rec.games.video, right?

Basically, I think if you get the computer game traffic out of misc,
both misc and board will be managable for anyone to read both groups.
The devision is already there, so why complicate things?

Just create rec.games.computer and be done with it.  As a matter of fact,
I was looking for rec.games.computer earlier today, since I didn't think
rec.games.misc would be the place to ask about Ultima VI.


>>Francis A. Uy			now a Bawlmorean, hon.

>Antti Karttunen       --  $B%"%s%C%F%#!!%+%k%C%H%%%M%s(J  (et{ty|t|n)

--
 _____________________________________________________________________
| kreme@nyx.cs.du.edu | The Coven BBS [303/777-2911] 1st METAL in MST |
| kreme@#22 (FV3 Net) | MST3K, Spacer Quest 3.4w, Anime files, & More |
| [303/722-2009] Vox  |          Unity Sleeps -- Neil Gaiman          |
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.music.makers.* groups
Keywords: music
Organization: Bradley University
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 04:08:29 GMT

barrett@gleep.cs.umass.edu (Daniel Barrett) writes:

>In article <1992Sep1.221432.11665@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> wes@ice.stx.com writes:
>>  As for .keyboards vs. .synth, these should be established as separate 
>>groups. One for keyboard techniques and the other for all types of 
>>synthesizers.
>
>	Is there a sizable group of people who discuss keyboard techniques
>on the Net?  If so, where are they discussing it now?  I don't see it in
>r.m.synth at all.  If not, then I'd say "don't bother."

If they're not discussing it in r.m.synth then they discuss it in
r.m.makers at the moment.  On the other hand, I don't see many keyboardists
discussing technique like guitarists or bassists or drummers do, so even if
one group isn't enough, I don't think a keyboard technique group would have
any traffic anyway.

-- 
=========*davE*.....making the world safe for intelligent dance music.=========
    Your shame is neverending...just one psychological drama after another.
--------------------------{dave@bradley.bradley.edu}---------------------------
From: eggert@twinsun.com (Paul Eggert)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.sun.sunnet.manager
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:59:23 GMT
Organization: Twin Sun, Inc

Very few items related to SunNet Manager are posted in existing
comp.sys.sun newsgroups.  I found only one article with ``sunnet'' in
its Subject: line (ignoring case) received in the last 5 days here.
We should wait until the need is demonstrated before starting a new
newsgroup.

Also, the newsgroup name is inappropriate.
From: gs26@prism.gatech.EDU (Glenn R. Stone)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: MISC.DISASTER.* NEWSGROUPS
Date: 8 Sep 92 18:11:35 GMT
Reply-To: glenn.stone@eas.gatech.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Group W Bench

In <JkTNqB1w165w@grafex.Cupertino.CA.US> steveh@grafex.Cupertino.CA.US (Steve Harding KA6ETB) writes:

>In the case of a disaster, such as the Loma Prieta earthquake, hurricanes
>Hugo and Andrew, etc., communications are disrupted...telephone lines are
>down.  In some cases, electrical power is lost.  Now, since most internet
>traffic is handle via telephone lines and computers need electricity, that
>means that disaster information coming from the area will most likely not
>make it into the internet.

Oh, but it did, too.  UCSC was back online within four hours and passing
data; I was the recipient of some of it.... the phones stayed up quite
well after Loma Prieta, especially the dedicated ones, which didn't 
require switching to run.... I remember some of the net.muckitymucks
yelling at the west coast to Get The News Out 'cause the dedicated lines
didn't impose a load on the dialup phone system and could be used to 
move stuff around.....

>Also, remember that those people in the area have better things to do
>than to hop on their computer and pass traffic into the internet.  Any
>information out of the affected area will be days old because of the
>situation.

Bah, humbug.  Remember you're bracketed by two University of California
sites, and when disaster hits, the students have nothing better to do 
than get online and tell the world what's going on.  Granted the TV nets
were more effective for the first few hours, but we got more news out
of Santa Cruz and Berkeley that was of a personal nature across the net
than we ever did, or could have, via voice.... 

I don't know if misc.disaster.* is appropriate or could be handled fast
enough or not... but the net.at.large is certainly capable of handling 
personal news, eyewitness reports, and even coordination of ad-hoc 
relief efforts (in addition to "official" ones)... at least in the case
of earthquakes... hurricanes or fire may be considerably more difficult, 
but an extension of ca.earthquakes or some such to manage earthquake 
relief is a very real possibility....

-- Glenn R. Stone (glenn.stone@eas.gatech.edu)
NSA encryption FBI Quayle coverup CIA drugs weapons kill phones DOD FLIP
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Improprieties (soc.culture.tamil ...
Date: 14 Sep 1992 22:15:42 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Sep14.203519.23870@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia) writes:
>In other words, it is okay for the vote taker to appeal to people
>to vote YES only or abstain, and then issue a CFV and start collecting votes.

Exactly correct, so long as the vote taker makes no appeals while the vote is
in progress. He can do anything his little old heart desires, as long as he
does it before the CFV.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
 "Keep in mind that Amateur Radio As We Know It Today will cease to exist
            at midnight tonight." -- Dave Newkirk, WJ1Z
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.best-of.usenet moderated, misc.best-of.usenet.d
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 02:34:02 GMT

Why the extra dot?  best-of-usenet is 14 characters...
--
Christopher Davis   | ]CALL -151       
<ckd@eff.org>       | *300: 20 DD FB 60
System Administrator| *3D0G            
EFF +1 617 864 0665 | ]CALL 768        
Lines: 23
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 09:42:52 MDT
From: gritton@alaska.et.byu.edu (Jamie Gritton)
Organization: Brigham Young University, Provo UT USA
Newsgroups: news.groups
Followup-To: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: news.software.inn
Reply-To: gritton@byu.edu

kent@imd.sterling.com (Kent Landfield) writes:

> NAME:    
> 	news.software.inn
> STATUS: 
> 	unmoderated

> This is a Request For Discussion concerning creating the newsgroup 
> news.software.inn. The purpose of this newsgroup is to give the community 
> a place to discuss InterNetNews, or INN, the news transport system.

We don't need another news-software newsgroup. The introduction of INN
is a good reason to get the ball rolling for news.software.transport.

> News.software.b has been, for the most part, where B news and C news 
> discussions have taken place while news.software.nntp as been used for 
> NNTP software related discussions.

news.software.nntp isn't a real Usenet group, and can't be considered
a valid option for the general public. Therefore the only real issue
here is renaming news.software.b to news.software.transport.
--
James Gritton - gritton@byu.edu - I disclaim