HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tale@ten.uu.net (David C Lawrence)
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: misc.support.smoking
Organization: UUNET Technologies, Inc.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:59:22 GMT

In <1992Jul20.191040.28561@edsi.plexus.COM> lon@edsi.plexus.COM
(Lon Ponschock) writes:

   I have forwarded the suggestion to David C. Lawrence who will very
   likely have the final say as regards name changes.

No, I don't.  The name brought to vote is whatever the proposer
settles on, hopefully after considering the input of other net users
during the discussion period.
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.unix.sysv386
From: kevin@iisat.alt.ns.ca (Kevin Davies)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization
Organization: Public Access UNIX
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 15:05:47 GMT

In article <2A6FFB8D.7962@tct.com>, chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
> According to Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews):
> 
> >Another idea would be to call it something like "dos_with_unix" to
> >include things like PC-Interface and PC NFS...
> 
> There's a thought.  Does anyone else have words of support or
> criticism for "c.u.dos-with-unix"?


I like that, although to be picky, would it be better
to use "c.u.unix-with-dos"  since it's unix we're running normally
and we're just adding in dos over on top of it.  The other way around,
I keep thinking of booting the machine in DOS mode, and then running
unix... 



-- 
Kevin Davies		Public Access Unix
Internet:  kevin@iisat.alt.ns.ca
UUCP	:  dalcs!iisat!kevin
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cust_ts@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tero Sand)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: 3rd RFD: comp.binaries.apple2 moderated
Date: 28 Jul 92 08:16:18 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In article <6!mmy#_.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>
>BTW, who are the proposed moderators? Jawaid would have my vote, but at
>this point I am not sure about Tero. Are there others?

Read my lips: NO! I REFUSE!
-- 
-Tero Sand
  EMail: cust_ts@cc.helsinki.fi     Snail mail: Auroran Sairaala os. 6-1
  (if that doesn't work, try                    Nordenskioldinkatu 20
   cust_ts@kruuna.helsinki.fi)                  00250 Helsinki 25, Finland
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: tinsel@uiuc.edu (Thomas Aaron Insel)
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.forsale.computers reorganization <-- alternatives?
Originator: tai50080@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Reply-To: tinsel@uiuc.edu
Organization: {not speaking for the} University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:26:48 GMT

bn050@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Gwochyuan Chen) writes: [heavily abridged]

> The blame, I believe, lies in that there is not a good Usenet News command
> to show multiple subject lines to readers.     I have a book

> Netnews Reference Manual by Anatole Olczak
> 2nd Ed., 1989, A System Publications, Inc., San Jose, CA

> which provides detail description on all Usenet News-related commands on
> UNIX.   I know little on how the News are presented to readers on other
> systems.    But for those news-reading commands on UNIX:
> readnews, rn, vn, and vnews
> only one article's subject line is shown on the screen each time.   Although
> there are commands to display ALL UNREAD articles' subject lines, they
> are scrolled off the screen very quickly.

>[..]

> What we need is to implement a new command which, by default, shows as many
> as the screen height allows, multiple articles' subject lines on the screen
> at reader's disposal.   We can move forward/backward a screenful of subject
> lines at ease.

A book published in '89, probably written in '88 isn't a very good reference
source for something as changing as USENET.  nn was based on this idea, and
new versions of rn/trn/xrn can also do this.  For those using vm, NNR does
the same thing.

> The News-reading environment at cleveland.freenet.edu is very close to what
> I describe above.   It display goes like this:
>[..]
> For a VT100 emulation screen, at least a dozen articles' subject lines can
> be seen simultaneously.  The * indicates the current article, while R
> indicates the article has been marked 'read'.    There are command to
> move up/down a screenful of subject display.   We can also jump to any
> articles with a single instruction.

I can do all of this using nn, but it's much easier to use, and much more
powerful.  I don't know what software you were using before, but if you
took some time to study its use, I'm sure you'd find it easier, too.
-- 
Thomas Aaron Insel (tinsel@uiuc.edu)
  I speak for myself, and not for the State or University of Illinois.
  "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty." -- Edward R. Murrow
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dawson@willard.UUCP
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization
Date: 22 Jul 92 01:10:50 GMT
Organization: Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814

mrl28033@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Michael R Linksvayer) writes:

> Why have unix in newsgroup names at all? Why not
> 
> comp.os.svr3
> comp.os.svr4
> comp.os.bsdi
> comp.os.bsd386
> comp.os.xenix
> 
> etc. Then nobody needs to argue about what is unix and what is
> not. 

My feelings exactly.  Thanks.

(Of course, you'll get arguments as to what is OS and what is windowing
 system... you'll never get rid of argument.)

> 
> -- 
> Mike Linksvayer   m-linksvayer@uiuc.edu   +1 217 344 1326


-- 
dawson@willard.UUCP (Willard Dawson)
Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: michael@resonex.com (Michael Bryan)
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization
Organization: Resonex Inc., Sunnyvale CA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:10:13 GMT

In article <2A768CD8.4F94@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>According to nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar):
>>I prefer the names
>>comp.unix.ibm.pc.16bit
>>comp.unix.ibm.pc.32bit
>
>I hadn't thought of that possibility.
>
>Does anyone think this proposal particularly (un)worthy?

Sounds fine to me, but I'd prefer "c.u.ibm-pc.*" over "c.u.ibm.pc.*"...
-- 
Michael Bryan        michael@resonex.com                     |     ,_,
"Pretenders I meet are making a trail along the way.         |    /oo \
They say that they know how to show me a path to guide my    |    <>__|
way to truth..." --- David York, "The Quiet of a Candle"     |    |  U|
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 12:19:36 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar):
>I prefer the names
>comp.unix.ibm.pc.16bit
>comp.unix.ibm.pc.32bit

I hadn't thought of that possibility.

Does anyone think this proposal particularly (un)worthy?
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
   "Do Rush place weird subliminal backmasked messages in their songs to
 compel unwilling geeks to commit evil .sig atrocities?"  -- Dean Engelhardt
Xref: sparky news.groups:16069 comp.unix.sysv386:12399
From: lothar@tmcsys.UUCP (Lothar Hirschbiegel)
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization
Date: 24 Jul 92 23:33:36 GMT
Reply-To: lh@aega84.uucp
Organization: Invisible Inc.

In article <14n406INN7mh@smaug.West.Sun.COM> Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews) writes:
>chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>But sometimes MS-DOS *isn't* being emulated.  For example, VP/ix and
>>Merge/386 actually _do_ run DOS in a virtual 8086.  Thus you have DOS
>>under UNIX, but the DOS is not emulated; it's real.
>
>I disagree.  Under VP/ix and Merge, the 386 is emulating an 8086 and Unix
>is emulating DOS and the BIOS.  Things like "in" and "out" instructions
>are trapped to Unix which emulates the I/O if it is allowed.

No, Chip is right. The I/O instructions are not *emulated*, they are simply
carried out under a different level of control. The "outb" instruction under
DOS still is an "outb" instruction under UNIX - same machine code.
An EMULATOR usually is different. In most cases (but not all) this will be a
piece of software translating a machine instruction with a certain bit pattern
in machine language to another bit pattern for a different processor. 
Of course there are also emulators for different hardware environments
-besides the CPU itself- and the same type of processors, but this is not
the "dos-under-unix" case.
(I once wrote a 68000 emulator for a long forgotten OS called "QDOS"
to make it run on a 386 processor - believe me, it's no fun:-).  
BTW: following your logic about emulation also PC-NFS or PCI (or strictly
speaking even KEYB.COM) would be "emulators" (since they also trap certain
syscalls and interpret them). They are not: they are *redirectors*.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
L. Hirschbiegel                                   email: unido!aega84!lh   
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: scott@phlpa.pha.pa.us (Scott Scheingold)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization
Organization: Ians' Playhouse
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 20:11:27 GMT

In article <14ka96INNc0m@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> Christophe.Wolfhugel@univ-lyon1.fr writes:
>scott@phlpa.pha.pa.us (Scott Scheingold) writes:
>> comp.os.sco.unix
>> comp.os.sco.xenix
>> comp.os.att.unix
>
>I would not like that because some site willing to take all Unix groups
>would have to generate an ugly entry in its sys file.
>
>I like being able to feed comp.unix.* or whatever as long as Unix
>stays as a sub-hierarchy.

I too do not like this either. I would like to see my first idea:

comp.os.sco
comp.os.att
etc..

One also has to think of what would be the most understandable (unix, xenix
ect.). I am not sure I agree with the ugly sys entry though. I run C-news
and my sys entry is listed 1 entry per line. I also list every group instead
of:

comp,\

So even if you took the second idea as quoted above I don't feel it would be
ugly. 


Scott



>
>-- 
>Christophe Wolfhugel    |    Email: Christophe.Wolfhugel@univ-lyon1.fr
>   "No keybord, press F1 to continue"


-- 
Need service? Ask me about USENET news feeds and mail service.
Scott Scheingold sysadmin   Voice   1-215-546-9959
UUCP 	...!{widener|dsinc}!jabber!phlpa!scott  or scott@phlpa.pha.pa.us
Compuserve 76057.607@compuserve.com  
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: shz@garage.att.com (Keeper of the 'Tude)
Subject: Re: rec.moto.harley
Organization: Office of 'Tude Licensing
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:25:33 GMT

In article <1992Jul20.202423.13338@ncsu.edu>, steve@bucolix.ncsu.edu (Steve Garnier) writes:
> >"Diligently working at mitigating biker-bigotry?"  Steve, wasn't it you
> >that was spewing negative stories from your bouncer days about stereotypical 
> >scooter trash last time r.m.h came up for discussion?  How does perpetuating
> >this negative image of Harley people help mitigate biker-bigotry?  Perhaps
> >you meant sometime else...      (Seth: 1,  Steve: 0)
> 
> Seth, you have a very selective memory.  I also stated that I had observed
> similar behavior from "Ninja gangs" while I was bouncing.

I must have missed this part of the original posting but will graciously
give you the benefit of the doubt.

> Would you like me to tell the
> world what you told me about how much you appreciated the Harley flame wars,
> how you found them entertaining, and how those flamewars were one of the
> reasons why you participated in rec.motorcycles?  Oh, geeeeee....I guess it
> just slipped out.  Sorry about that, Seth, Keeper of the 'Tude.

Is this really a surprise to anyone?  I like Harleys and the discussion of
them, good, bad and ugly.  My reason for a Harley sub-group is not to
protect the other Harley-folk or myself from flames but to *categorize*
the Harley stuff so it is more accesssible without searching.  I don't
always have time to wade through helmet flames, diatribes about lance
holst, etc., and sometimes want to get directly to the Harley stuff in a
hurry.  A Harley sub-group would permit this and the mailing list has
shown there is adequate interest in such a packaging change.

Seth Zirin (known as "Roid" over in flame-land)
From: vhspet01@uctvax.uct.ac.za (Peter van Heusden)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Looking for Net psychology/sociology group
Summary: Trying to find a discussion group for psychological/sociological implic
Date: 22 Jul 92 11:58:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: uctvax.1992Jul22.095831.202066
Organization: University of Cape Town

Is there a group available for discussions of the social and psychological
implecations of the existence of a worldwide Net? (Now and in the future).
This would range from discussions of how user's opinions are influenced by
the amount of traffic, to the psychology of relationships via computer 
connection, to more diffuse discussion of remote access as an extra sense,
as well as possibly extending discussions to future changes.

If not, is anyone interested in starting one?

Peter
 
*******************************************************************************
Peter van Heusden              "She was screaming as she fell
UCTVAX, Cape Town                But I never heard her hit"
vhspet01@uctvax.uct.ac.za                                  Violent Femmes
*******************************************************************************
From: weigl@sibelius.inria.fr (Konrad Weigl)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.moto.harley
Date: 22 Jul 92 15:30:51 GMT
Organization: INRIA, Sophia-Antipolis (Fr)

In article <1992Jul21.153947.27527@wpi.WPI.EDU>, mick@maxine.wpi.edu (Ravi Narayan) writes:
|> Somewhere, Sometime, Thus Spake shz@garage.att.com (Keeper of the 'Tude):
|> :- 
|> :- It would also be a moot venture to explain the ideas behind Harley Davidson
|> :- motorcycling to someone who has never been on one.  Let me instead ask you
|> :- if you have ever taken the trouble to test ride a Harley Davidson?
|> 
|> 	i have had occasion to ride with a couple of friends of mine who
|> 	ride harley davidson motorcycles. i have ridden one of the
|> 	motorcycles a few times, but that would hardly provide me a
|> 	complete insight into h-d motorcycling, if such a thing exists
|> 	unique from general motorcycling. in fact, these are the reasons
|> 	that prompt me to request the h-d riders to stay with r.m.

Hm...Let me see if I got this right:
Since you, for what reason whatever, are lacking the sensors to grasp the 
difference between a Harley Davidson and another motorcycle, you want
to _FORCE_ Harley riders _AS A GROUP_ to stay on rec.moto?


Is that the person that wrote:

	in essence therefore, the voting process is directed not at
	anyone out there, but at people who can participate and vote
	with intelligence... note the word directed (as against "meant
	for"). anyone with any "god-given" cause can of course vote, but
	i would hope the voting process is not directed at them.

	an intelligent voter is one who understands and appreciates the
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	issues involved, studies the charter, and ascertains the need
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	and justification (not the same thing) for a new group *based*
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	on the information provided in the charter.
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Have you EVER, EVER, considered the yardstick you'd like the criteria 
voters to comply to TO YOURSELF???


Let me outta here, QUICK!!!!!

Konrad Weigl               Tel. +33 93 65 78 63
Projet Pastis              Fax  +33 93 65 76 43
INRIA                      email weigl@sophia.inria.fr
B.P. 93
06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex 
France



 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: Michael Steckner <steckner@lri.uwo.ca>
Subject: RE:Ideas on how to split rec.aviation
Organization: Relayed-by-Sendmail
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:41:03 GMT
To: news.groups@julian.uwo.ca


    >rec.aviation.misc
    >rec.aviation.soaring
    >rec.aviation.powered
    >rec.aviation.powered.ifr

I think that Robert Dorsett is getting closer to what we need with this
outline. Personally I dont totally agree with all his points, and come
to a slightly different list of minimum groups:
    
    rec.aviation.misc
    rec.aviation.soaring
    rec.aviation.powered
    rec.aviation.regs
    rec.aviation.simulators

>if soaring turns out to be a low-volume group, some users may grow to
>conclude it deals with soaring-hardware or somesuch.  In addition,
>those with "soaring == gliders" mindsets might put ballooning or
>hang-gliding discussions in a flying/piloting group (I, for instance,
>view ballooning as more "floating" than "soaring"; soaring has the

I cannot totally agree with this. Hang gliders certainly soar so I dont
think anyone in that department should be offended. Ballooning or
MPA (man powered aircraft) how many posts have we seen? Any statistics?
I had hoped that the RFD might have gotten out some ballooners and MPA
folks. I dont recall seeing any (apologies if I am wrong). We have a 
charter to get around such problems. If the a discussion starts in
the inappropriate group all it takes is a gentle no-flame reminder
about what groups are available.

    >IFR
    >VFR
    >Regs

> various discussion

If IFR is heavily Regs based discussion, then get a Regs group. For 
symmetry reasons it would seem odd to the world that we have an IFR
group but no VFR group. To me that seems bass-ackwards. Just personal
bias. Dont forget, glider pilots have to deal with the VFR regs as well, 
so a powered.regs may be inappropriate. Why not a .regs?

>The cross-posting issue is important.  There are 100,000 nodes on the HP 
>network, for instance, a lot of HP pilots, and a lot of HP pilots reading 

Ok, I am stupid. What is HP? If you use unique short forms. Can you 
identify them?

If simulators are such a big thing we should have a group for them.

My proposal, for all it is worth....

    rec.aviation.misc
    rec.aviation.soaring
    rec.aviation.powered
    rec.aviation.regs
    rec.aviation.simulators

We can try this for a year or so, see how things develop and
subdivide as needed. If gas prices go up to $25.00 gallon then
the volume in simulators may require another group!
From: uerics@mcl.ucsb.edu (Eric D. Shepherd)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: 3rd RFD: comp.binaries.apple2 moderated
Date: 28 Jul 92 03:26:57 GMT

In <1992Jul24.103011.6265@klaava.Helsinki.FI> cust_ts@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tero Sand) writes:

>>   be 100% effective.  The moderator and assistants reserve the right to
>>   cancel any posting in comp.binaries.apple2 that is deemed inappropriate.
>>						       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>I'm not sure I like that last part (mind you, I'm still for moderation).
>Maybe it should be "... deemed inappropriate as stated in the charter"?

I concur.  Although I trust Jawaid & Co. implicitly, I agree that the current
reading gives the moderators a bit too much leeway.  Does the charter
actually state explicitly what types of posts are permitted?  This proposed
change is only valid if that is the case (I haven't read the proposed
charter for a couple of weeks).  But something of the sort is necessary.

- Eric S.

--
Eric D. Shepherd   | ACM Member | Apple II Alliance Charter Member | 
--------------------------------+-----------------------------------
InterNet: uerics@mcl.ucsb.edu   | Use FahrWorks & watch the sparks
America Online: Sheppy          | fly!      - Fahr Corp. Slogan
From: grog@adagio.UUCP (Greg Lehey)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: yet another BSD newsgroup proposal (:-(
Date: 22 Jul 92 12:42:12 GMT
Organization: LEMIS, Schellnhausen 2, W-6324 Feldatal, Germany

In article <3060@ra.nrl.navy.mil> atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Randall Atkinson) writes:
>Folks,
>
>  BSD _is_ more of a UNIX (tm)-like system than A WHOLE LOT of the
>existing comp.unix.* newsgroups.  Creating comp.os.386bsd is
>nonsensical.  I could see creating comp.unix.bsd.386 and renaming
>comp.unix.bsd to comp.unix.bsd.misc, but the above proposal for
>comp.os.386bsd flies in the face of USENET custom and practice.

Agreed. UNIX may be a registered trade mark of AT&T, but then AT&T is
a generic modem test command. In this country, at any rate, freedom of
speech is guaranteed, and it's pretty obvious that the usage here has
nothing to do with advertising. If this general tendency of large
companies to make words copyright continues, it may soon be impossible
to hold a normal conversation.  A large number of trademarks have gone
into everyday use (what other word do you people use for Heroin (r),
trademark of Bayer, though they probably don't want to be reminded of
it). Why should AT&T tell *me* what I call an operating system?

>  Moreover, short of moderating the newsgroup to prevent it, one
>should fully expect that articles about BSDI's 386 product will be
>posted to the proposed new newsgroup (regardless of name) simply
>because a large chunk of the net users don't pay much attention to
>what they are doing.

This would not be the only reason. Personal taste and prejudices
aside, 386BSD and BSD/386 have more in common than the name. I am
currently in the process of developing some software for BSD/386 which
would probably also be of use to a lot of 386BSD users. Would it be
misguided of me to post information about it to the new group?
-- 
Greg Lehey                       | Tel: +49-6637-1488              
LEMIS                            | Fax: +49-6637-1489
Schellnhausen 2, W-6324 Feldatal, Germany
*** NOTE ***: Headers are mangled - reply to grog%lemis@Germany.EU.net
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: tinsel@uiuc.edu (Thomas Aaron Insel)
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.forsale.computers reorganization
Originator: tai50080@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Reply-To: tinsel@uiuc.edu
Organization: {not speaking for the} University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:14:15 GMT

chip@chinacat.unicom.com (Chip Rosenthal) writes:

> While we are at it, any misc.forsale reorg which fails to comprehend
> the growing number of `wanted' and discussion messages is doomed to
> failure.  Personally, I think we should look at consolidating
> `misc.forsale' and `misc.wanted' into `misc.market' -- and we should
> stop creating market subgroups all over the place.  There is a reason
> why forsale/wanted were created in misc and not comp.

Yes, group titles should reflect their purposes, and the mass of
forsale and wanted groups can confuse new users -- it confused me, at
least.
-- 
Thomas Aaron Insel (tinsel@uiuc.edu)
  I speak for myself, and not for the State or University of Illinois.
  "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty." -- Edward R. Murrow
Newsgroups: news.groups