HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:45:23 GMT

In article <BxE3sC.M0z@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim  
Pierce) writes:
> In article <1992Nov6.214300.3100@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com  
(Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
> 
> >In article <BxACry.BI2@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim  
> >Pierce) writes:
> >
> >> The very fact that the CFV was crossposted to rec.music.synth was by
> >> definition an indication that that group was involved.
> >> 
> >Evidence to the contrary has been posted.
> 
> Oh, *really*?  I eagerly await to hear all about it.
> 

If you're actively following this thread I'm certain you must have already  
read it. Or did you happen to miss it? Naw THAT cou'dn't happen, we've  
already read how you don't miss a thing.

> > 
> >What an amazingly condescending attitude. All we're saying is that the  
> >person that posted the RFD's and CFV's should have taken the time to  
write  
> >a subject line that indicated that r.m.s was affected.
> 
> Evidence to the contrary has been posted.

There's EVIDENCE that he shouldn't have taken the time to do so? THAT I'd  
like to read. He has stated it would have been difficult. Does that mean  
it shouldn't be done? Interesting 'evidence'.

> Should the subject line
> have indicated also that alt.guitar.bass and alt.guitar.tab were
> affected?  Readers of those groups have not spoken up to complain.
> 

The people in these groups SHOULD have been informed as well. Do you  
subscribe to those groups? I don't. Do you know that no one objects?  
Perhaps the outcome has less negative impact for them.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cathyf@is.rice.edu (Catherine Anne Foulston)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Rice University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:28:08 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.183102.22331@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>You can't prove that this consensus of a small number of people represents 
>the will of the entire readership of the net. Proof by correct politics 
>is not a proof at all. 

Well, let's suppose for a moment the subject line had been something
that attracted the attention of all rec.music.synth readers who saw
it, and they all voted.

How do you want to make the decision?
1) "the will of the entire readership of the net."  How will you find
that out?  You will not get everyone on the net to vote no matter
what you do.  Even if all rec.music.synth readers voted, which would
probably never happen, that would not be the will of the entire
readership.

2) Something other than the will of the entire readership.  How do you
want to do it then?  The current system?  You seem to have problems
with it.  Something else?

I'm not trying to flame you or anything in this article.  You clearly
have problems with the current process and I am just curious how you
think votes should be done.

	Cathy
-- 
Cathy Foulston + Rice University + Network & Systems Support + cathyf@rice.edu
From: jimkirk@news.uwyo.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Metalworking RFD-->CFV
Date: 11 Nov 92 17:46:02 GMT
Organization: University of Wyoming - Laramie, WY

The discussion period for rec.crafts.metalworking is drawing to a close.
The next step will be the CFV, if I can figure out exactly how to post
it (I am presuming for the moment the steps are the same as the RFD).

There were only two points discussed, really.

1.  Inclusion in the charter of joining metal by more than just welding.
    Since this is a minor addition to slightly broaden the scope of the
    group, and not a major re-definition of the group's purpose in life,
    I am presuming I don't need to issue another RFD and go through
    another 30-day discussion period.  If I get any grief about this,
    I will simply revert to the original charter and amend it after the
    group is created.

2.  There was a large discussion about the name, and whether "crafts"
    is desirable.  For the most part, those who want the group don't
    like "crafts".  For the most part, those who think they run the net
    like "crafts," waving the argument that hierarchy is good.  Sick of
    the whole thing, I feel the general consensus is to accept "crafts"
    rather than see the group not get created.

CFV coming soon, I hope.  For the record, the RFD was posted on October 13.
Today, November 11, is the 30th day of discussion (or 29th depending on
whether you count all of 10/13).

Jim Kirkpatrick
jimkirk@corral.uwyo.edu
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: Should rec.music.makers.synth stand as a group name?
Date: 10 Nov 1992 18:23:04 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <BxIHor.Es@uunet.uu.net> dave@elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>This is a request for discussion on letting rec.music.makers.synth stand
>as a replacement for rec.music.synth. 

It should be a discussion on a vote to rename rec.music.makers.synth back to
rec.music.synth.

>In the past, rec.music.synth has always been a group for informal discussion
>about synthesizers and computer music. Recently, a newsgroup voting process
>was held, a name change was proposed to "rec.music.makers.synth", and it
>passed technically. 

Your last qualifier was unnecessarily and inflammatory. (What else should I
have expected, given the history of this discussion??) The vote passed, pure
and simple.

>Unfortunately, an unclear subject line and a >20 line article introduction
>created the possiblity that many rec.music.synth posters missed the call for 
>votes. Since the resulting flamewar has called much attention to this matter,
>any vote should capture a more unbiased sample of the will of the net. 

By definition, the will of the net is free of any meaningful bias. The vote
that passed WAS the will of the net. Your refusal to recognize that fact is
the proximate cause of the current trouble.

Once again, the readers of r.m.s had all the opportunity that anyone else got
to express their opinions and vote. That they chose to do so is their problem,
not ours.

>Therefore, this RFD is the prelude to a vote on keeping the new name for the
>group. The question the vote will ask is: "Should rec.music.makers.synth stand 
>as a group name?". 

NO! You're revoting the original question, on which the net has already
spoken. You should, in order to follow the Guidelines, ask if the group should
be renamed back. I will campaign as loud, and as hard, to have that vote
overturned on procedural grounds as you are against the current result - and,
I suspect, I'll get a better response.

>As a clearly biased member of this discussion, I am asking for a volunteer
>neutral vote taker to run the vote. It would be impossible for me to run
>it as it stands now. 

There's no precedent requiring an unbiased vote taker, but if you choose to
get someone else to run the vote, I won't object.
-- 
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.
     We survived Jimmy Carter; we'll (probably) survive Bill Clinton.
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 11 Nov 1992 13:38:00 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <BxJr5L.HL4@fulcrum.co.uk> igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten) writes:
>Rename compared to racial segregation!  Next move: killing of group
>compared to genocide, Jay-as-Hitler, imminent death of net predicted,
>film, even, at eleven.

I'd have to trim and dye my mustache; red somehow doesn't fit the picture. 

Besides, it should be MPEGs at 11.
-- 
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.
     We survived Jimmy Carter; we'll (probably) survive Bill Clinton.
Xref: sparky news.groups:20814 news.admin.policy:221
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 9 Nov 1992 15:45:41 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Nov9.094511.11513@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
[about holding a revote]
>Quite because the damage will have already been done and this will 
>fragment r.m.s even worse. Also because No votes have more weight than
>Yes votes...and the "spite" vote is out there. 

You're doing the only damage that's being done right now. If you'd quit
damaging the group and implement the expressed will of the net, there would
*be* *no* *damage*.

My NO vote on a re-renaming would not be out of spite, but rather that I would
object to such a flagrant flouting of the expressed will of the net.
-- 
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.
     We survived Jimmy Carter; we'll (probably) survive Bill Clinton.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 04:18:04 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.215301.18928@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>>I suppose you have mail in your mailbox from Bill Clinton objecting to
>>the r.m.s rename vote.
>
>From: clinton@democrats.org
>To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
>Subject: Renaming of rec.music.synth

Sorry, Dave. Your forgery falls flat. Democrats.org is a non-existant
domain.

Just goes to show how far someone will go to create facts when they
have none. 

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: Music Group Reorg Disagreement (was Re: *BAD* ...)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:15:55 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen):
>If the process REQUIRES that you receive adequate and accurate
>information from a 3rd party, the current process has a hole, IMHO.

But there is no such current requirement, because a third party is
just _one_ possible source of information.

Another source is news.announce.newusers, which is where I learned
everything I needed to know (to get started :-)).
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
                 just another elitist Usenet administrator
From: igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 11 Nov 92 10:07:45 GMT
Organization: Fulcrum Communications

In article <1992Nov9.203351.3335@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
> No way. If you folks won't compromise, I won't. Nyahh. <grin>

Then shut up, ignore the vote, and live with the consequences.  If you
had spent a tenth of the time you have wasted shouting into the wind on
sorting your BBS out to handle the change, the users would never have
known.

ian
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: mmt@RedBrick.COM (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS)
Subject: Re: Why alt.folklore.computers should stay in alt (was: leave alt.folklore.computers alone, rmgroup comp.society.folklore)
Organization: Red Brick Systems, Los Gatos, CA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:19:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.022632.13242@tc.cornell.edu>, mdw@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Matt Welsh) writes:
[...]
>a.f.c is so deeply rooted in the USENET hierarchy that I can see no reason
                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>to change it or move it elsewhere. Doing so would only damage its present
>propagation and sense of unity. 

Except that it *isn't* in the Usenet hierarchy.  It's in the
"altnet" hierarchy.  I'm not just pointing this out for the
sake of nit-picking, but to re-emphasize the fact that alt
*does* have a certain stigma when compared to Usenet.

Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing for a.f.c isn't
really clear, and I don't really have an opinion about it.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Maxime Taksar              KC6ZPS           mmt@RedBrick.COM
Xref: sparky news.groups:20257 rec.music.synth:17693
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 5 Nov 92 02:54:02 GMT
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA

killer@robin.cs.hut.fi (Kalle Kivimaa) writes:
>That is true.  Also, if Bill Clinton would have won the election
>by one vote, would you say that he has no right to be president?

The presidentail election has no bearing on this one. Besides, everyone 
was informed of the voting process months ahead of time. 

>If we 'just move' a group, then how can it concern the people on mailing
>lists?  The one person concerned is the list keeper, who has to change
>the aliasing.  (OK, moving r.m.s to r.m.m.s might have some other effects
>besides the move)

You know...that just might be too many characters for the list server to 
handle? Would that fact change the vote?

>Because Clinton got only about 25% of the possible votes, and not a clear
>majority, should he not become the presindent?

That's a straw man. The concern here is that those who use a newsgroup are
subject to name changes that they do not want. This is, in fact, the issue.

>So you think that people shun away because they use MIDI and synts for
>something else than making music?

I don't want to argue about the newsgroup name per se...it may have been 
misnamed anyway. Perhaps when it was named...MIDI wasn't a real standard yet.
In any case, it serves it's purpose quite well. My site will not be rmgrouping
it at all. Neither will my feed. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

The most important service rendered by the press is that of educating people to
approach printed matter with distrust. 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jeffj@yang.earlham.edu (ChaOs)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Claymores
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:59:11 GMT
Organization: Honest John's Used Toaster Emporium

In article <BxIKtC.2oy@nic.umass.edu>, dunkelza@titan.ucc.umass.edu (KEITH C MCCORMIC) writes:
> In article <1992Nov10.015709.7642@zia.aoc.nrao.edu> awkerr@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Alan Kerr) writes:
>>In article <BxGL6M.5o6@nic.umass.edu> dunkelza@titan.ucc.umass.edu (KEITH C MCCORMIC) writes:
>>
>><<< a *bunch* of stuff deleted>>>
>><<< and a bunch of attributions lost>>>

OK, I went and looked in my copy of _A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration
and Use of Arms and Armor_ by George Stone, and this is what it said:

"CLAYMORE.  Originally the Scotch two-handed sword of the 15th and 16th
centuries.  The claidheamh-mor or claidhmhichean-mhora.  It had a long, heavy
blade with a straight grip with a small pommel and straight quillons slanting
toward the blade."

There's also a picture, the sword has a straight blade - no horns, spikes,
secondary guards, or whatever you interpreted #2 in the diagram as being.

"FLAMBERGE.  In the early middle ages this name was applied to almost any large
sword; but it became restricted to those with waved or undulating edges."

"BROADSWORD.  A sword with a straight, wide, single-edged blade." 
Broadswords are one-handed, BTW.

Zweihander is simply German for "Two-hander".

-- 
Jeff (ChaOs) Johnston                             JeffJ@yang.earlham.edu
From: fau@po.CWRU.Edu (Francis A. Uy)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: a victim of the r.m.makers reorg needs help
Date: 9 Nov 1992 15:20:41 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: fau@po.CWRU.Edu (Francis A. Uy)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


I have been corresponding with 
 jrossi@eagle.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil
 concerning rec.music.synth.  He
 has been receiving that group via
 an automatic forwarding daemon at
 an organization he longer belongs
 to.  Thus, he has no ability to get
 the name changed properly.

Will someone affiliated with the CFV
 please help him get reconnected?
-- 
Francis A. Uy			Program Director, WUMD
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
From: rorschak@daimi.aau.dk (Jesper Lauridsen)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Xanth Watch
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 21:47:16 GMT

gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:

>Unimportant to YOU. This whole issue was unimportant to many people until  
>previously. Perhaps, one shouldn't have to know the insides of the net  
>guidelines to make an informed decsision about the fate of the newsgroups  
>that they subscribe to.

All you have to do is to read a single article and follow the instructions
found within. It's simple and easy to learn.
-- 
Jesper Lauridsen        |  I survived the rec.arts.sf-lovers split
rorschak@daimi.aau.dk   | 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: mmeltzer@wam.umd.edu
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.unicycles
Reply-To: mmeltzer@wam.umd.edu
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 16:08:54 GMT

In article <BxnGI1.FCA@uunet.uu.net> terry@santafe.edu writes:
:-> This is a formal Request for Discussion on the creation of a new 
:-> newsgroup called "rec.unicycles" (not moderated).

I think this would be great, especially for us jugglers!

---------------------------------------------------------------------
			mmeltzer@wam.umd.edu is

			     Marc Meltzer
		      President of The Meltz Inc
	 "Our job is to play games.  Our hobby is to consult."
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:18:17 GMT

In article <BxEx1y.7w6@news.orst.edu> stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John  
Stanley) writes:
> In article <1992Nov6.065425.473@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon  
Van Huizen) writes:
> >I agree with Ken here. I don't think it was clear at all. If you scan  
> >several hundred messages a day would YOU notice a CFV if it didn't look  
> >like it was for your group? 
> 
> How do you know it isn't for your group unless you notice it?  The fact
> that it was posted in your group means that it has some meaning for that
> group. If you notice it, and then choose to ignore it, that was your
> decision.
> 
> P.S. it isn't "your group". It is the net's group. It belongs to
> everyone. Even those who currently aren't reading it.

Surely at this point you're arguing for the sake of argument. I'm trying  
to suggest positive steps so that this doesn't happen in the future, not  
debate semantics.

Jeez.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
From: leonard@mimsy.umd.edu (Leonard Dickens)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:10:27 GMT
Organization: Deep Thirteen, Gizmonics Institute

Andy McFadden writes:
>As I see it, the issues are:
>(1) do we want another group(s)?
>(2) do we want the divisions adc proposed?
>(3) do we want them to be moderated?
>(4) do we want adc to moderate them?
>
>I for one wouldn't mind an UNmoderated rec.games.netrek.programmer.  Just one,
>no moderation.

Me too.  I know personally the relationship of three of my friends to
r.g.n.  One (Gamera) reads all of r.g.n.  One (Stress) seems to be
perpertually behind 200 messages.  And one (Mr. Boffo) does not read
it at all any more because the volume of fluff is too high.  I think
that there could be a lot of support for a division similar to what
adc proposes.

Personally, I would vote for the creation of r.g.n.programmer,
unmoderated, along with Andy and many others.  I don't know that the
volume would justify the group, however.

Also I would like to see a r.g.n.announce, moderated.  There are a
number of announcement types that are of interest to the netrek
community as a whole that are currently only available buried in the
noise of r.g.n: the netrek FAQ, new server announcements, clue game
announcements, new client announcements, client improvement
announcements, INL announcements, even NBR reporting.  I believe that
there are a great number of netrek players that would be interested in
subscribing to a low volume high signal group with information like
this -- people that do not currently subscribe to r.g.n due to the
volume it produces.

Those are the only changes I think would be useful.  The creation of a
separate INL board is absurd, IMO.

I have no objection to adc moderating groups, but neither am I
especially enamored of his leadership.  I cannot imagine there being
serious enough disagreement about what constitutes interesting
announcements to really be a problem, though.  R.g.n fluff is usually
very plainly fluff, and the substantial announcements usually fairly
plainly that as well.

-Leonard
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 21:26:12 GMT
Organization: None for me, thanks . . . I'm driving.
Distribution: na

dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:

>> I have yet to see anything explain why this renaming is a bad thing in
>> general.  [Lazlo]
>
> Ok: It Wasn't Broken...Why'd We "Fix" It? 

I'll be a lot more impressed with your complaints when you get around to
actually answering that question.  I'll do you the courtesy of answering
*yours*, but if you can't answer *mine* you don't have a leg to stand on
in this discussion.

rec.music.synth is a "broken" groupname because it's in the wrong place in
the rec.music hierarchy.  The name of the group, in context, implies that
the group is for the discussion of synthesizer music, when in fact it's
used to discuss synth hardware.  The best place in the existing hierarchy
for a newsgroup that discusses the making of music with synthesizers is
rec.music.*makers*. 

I know from painful experience that there are a lot of people on the net
who are more interested in keeping everything the way it is than in
keeping things organized.   Well, I work with library cataloging and
classification systems on a daily basis so I have *first-hand*, *daily*
confirmation of the importance of keeping information under control -- and
I don't give a damn what the people who say "no" just for the sake of
saying "no" think anymore.  Your insistence on keeping the books on the
shelves where you've always found them instead of on the shelves where
they actually *belong* is unbelievably selfish -- the only person it
benefits is you, whereas making groupnames reasonably consistent across
the namespace benefits everyone who's looking for a newsgroup or providing
a feed with one.  And it hurts absolutely *nobody*.

If you can't come up with a single good reason why this name change would
be bad for the newsgroup, you've got absolutely nothing to complain about.
It's getting very old, Dave.

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)
Newsgroups: news.groups