HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: "BAD" music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 8 Nov 1992 20:41:51 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Nov7.214311.2554@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
>I and a number of other people have suggested (and no one responds to  
>these postitive suggestions) that the guideline should be that subject  
>lines for discussions and votes should DIRECTKY state what existing  
>newsgroups they would affect. Is this too difficult? At least it's a  
>suggestion.

>I can't imagine a valid reason for a "no" response to this suggestion.

Subject: CFV: rename alt.guitar, alt.bass, alt.guitar.tab, and rec.music.synth

We're at 79 columns, and have made no mention of that they're being renamed
to, much less that yet one more group is to be created!!

Remember that there's an 80-column limit to each header line, and that most
newsreaders and mail user interfaces that display Subject: lines in a group
for selection only display the first 55 or so characters of the first line.

You'd have the reorg broken up into several messages. Such needless
duplication of message space, much less either the increased confusion from
having multiple CFVs point to one vote mailbox or the increased work for
voters and vote takers in running five completely separate votes just to make
it easier on lazy users is much more trouble than it's worth.
-- 
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: rana@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (Nabeel Ahmad Rana)
Subject: Re: soc.religion.ahmadiyya
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:29:51 GMT

fau@po.CWRU.Edu (Francis A. Uy) writes:


>In a previous article, nadeem@igpho (Nadeem Malik) says:

>>I am posting this article becausing I believe that it has a bearing 
>>on the need to have our own newsgroup named soc.religion.ahmadiyya. It 
>                                                      ^^^^^^^
>>seems to me that many people are still not convinced that there is actually
>>a need to set up a new group under this name, maderated by Ahmadi Muslims.

>Nadeem,

>The main objection is not to the EXISTENCE
> of this group.  The objection is that other
> muslims do not want you to use the word ISLAM
> in the name.  

>Please save yourself (and the rest of us) some 
> trouble and call it soc.religion.ahmadiyya
>-- 
>Francis A. Uy			Program Director, WUMD


Well, Mr. Francis A. Uy, if other muslims don't want
to see the word ISLAM in this newsgroup, does that mean
the Usenet Community should not support the creation of
this newsgroup?? Do the other muslims have a patent for
the word "ISLAM"??

Sincerely,

-- 
Nabeel A. Rana
rana@rintintin.colorado.edu
LOVE FOR ALL : HATRED FOR NONE.
________________________________________________________________
From: mackinto@oasys.dt.navy.mil (David Mackintosh)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.unicycles
Date: 13 Nov 92 19:22:39 GMT
Reply-To: mackinto@oasys.dt.navy.mil (David Mackintosh)
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In news.groups, terry@santafe.edu writes:

>NAME
>  The name should probably be rec.unicycles, in line with the
>  rec.bicycles hierarchy.  ...

Actually, it is now rec.bicycle.* (singular).  There are six sub-
divisions.  The original group, rec.bicycles, will be dropped soon.

Would it make sense to add unicycles to the bicycle anarchy (hierarchy)?
The name would then be:
			rec.bicycle.unicycle[s]
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 08:32:33 GMT

In article <1dbpgnINNaeg@agate.berkeley.edu> shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff) writes:

>Perhaps the CFV subject line should make it clear to whom the CFV is relevant?

If the CFV is posted to a group that you read, it's relevant to that
group.  In cases like this (CFV for some apparently irrelevant issue
posted to a group I read), I'm even MORE intrigued about the CFV,
since I have to wonder why it's posted to this apparently irrelevant
group.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Xref: sparky news.groups:21269 rec.music.synth:18299
From: killer@robin.cs.hut.fi (Kalle Kivimaa)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 11 Nov 92 23:35:37 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, CS lab

In <1992Nov10.213658.16610@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:

>Acutally, the problem with putting it in "makers" is the fact that it
>robs keyboard and piano players from getting their own group. They
>are music makers too, but when you newsgroup naming purists get wind
>of any RFD for that you'll point and scream about rec.music.makers.synth.

Oh, then all the brass and woodwind players must feel robbed too,
as the proposal did not include groups for them.

If the traffic warrants (and I think it does) split r.m.m.s into
r.m.m.synth
r.m.m.midi
r.m.m.piano
and maybe even r.m.m.keyboard (although I believe that .synth and .piano
should suffice).
--
************************************************************************
* The night sky over the planet Krikkit is the least interesting sight *
* in the entire Universe.  -- Douglas Adams, HHGTG                     *
************************************************************************
From: dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: SOC.RELIGION.ISLAM.AHMADIYYA
Summary: This is getting ridiculous!
Date: 9 Nov 92 21:50:33 GMT
Organization: Data Factory Services, Harrisburg, Pa.

In article <100672@bu.edu>, khalid@bu-bio.bu.edu (Rasheed A. Khalid) writes:
> In article <1992Nov5.201721.1074@wolves.uucp> news@wolves.uucp (The Wolfe
> of the Den) writes:
> >There have been a lot of bytes transmitted about this proposed group,
> >all claiming to deal with the justifications for or objections to the
> >group.
> 
> >Certain BASIC questions about the group have *not* been dealt with.
> 
> Please take a look at Wolfe's English:
> (blank lines indicate deletions in the article)

[ several examples of spelling, grammar and punctuation errors deleted ]

> In spite of having such poor English, criticism such as the following
> stands a little out of place (about the proposed moderator(s) of the
> proposed "sria" newsgroup), especially in the same article:
> 
> >The "lingua fraca" of Usenet is (like it or not) English, and there seem
>      *************
>       (spelling!)
> >to be some problems with their command of that language.  Furthermore, I
> 
> It seems that the Wolfe of the Den is already engaged in the flame war
> and the questionable actions advised against.  Just making a point, you
> know?  Take it easy!

A point poorly made and juvenile in appearance. Spelling and grammar
wars are typically frowned upon on the net and in most cases the last
gasp of a person drowning in a losing argument. 

What "The Wolfe" was referring to were awkwardly constructed sentences
that failed to make a coherent point, were difficult to follow and in
many cases rambled along seemingly without end.  He was NOT nitpicking
individual errors, as you did, but was pointing out that the people
involved were having difficulty communicating with any clarity to the
net, in HIS opinion (mine too but that's beside the point). 

He was pointing out a basic problem and trying to get some direction
into the discussion. Congratulations on focusing on ONE portion of his
posting and turning the whole thing into something useless and petty. 

> Regards,
> A smiling Rasheed
> at Boston.

You're the only one I see smiling. 

Is it time for the damn vote yet? This whole discussion is getting
nowhere.



-- 
 ...uunet!wa3wbu!frackit!dave -or-                       |  Dave Ratcliffe  |
 frackit!dave@uunet.UU.NET -or- dave@frackit.uucp -or-   |  Sys. <*> Admin. |
 vogon1!compnect!frackit!dave@psuvax1.psu.edu            | Harrisburg,  Pa. |
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cuz@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Cousin It)
Subject: Re: rec.music.makers.*: chronology and comments from the vote-taker.
Organization: Posters Anonymous
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 06:27:33 GMT

gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
|In article <96646@netnews.upenn.edu> rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich  
|Kulawiec) writes:

|> At this point, the "Subject" line is sitting at around 158 characters,
|> and that's without mentioning the rec.music.makers.percussion proposal,
|> which, as I said above, is probably the most significant proposal of  
|all.

|Send seperate articles with different subject lines to the affected group.  
|Even a small message which is a pointer to the one with your exiting  
|subject line would have been a help.

	That sounds really good. Think off all the fragmented
discussions we can have then. The reason why we don't do that now is
so we can have a logical place and headers for discussion/all
discussion will be under "one roof". If you take your method, in this
case, without taking in any of the usual fragmentation that happens
anyway (*sigh*), there would have been a high probability of having 5
seperate discussions. On the same proposal. This is not good.

|I don't doubt for a moment that you had the best of intentions. I also  
|agree that the existing subject line is logically correct even if it  
|doesn't tell the whole story. I just think there should have been a better  
|attempt to make the impact clear and the affected existing groups aware of  
|it.

	Fine, end of discussion. If you find the subject logically
correct, and people don't read it, that's thier problem. We can't, nor
should we hand proposals to "the ignorant horde" on a silver platter.
If they don't realize that a CFV/RFD, which was posted into "thier"
group might be important to said group, then they aren't responsible.
And they deserve the fate they get. Besides, the subject line is not
there to make impact clear, that is what the message body is for. 

|This is a VERY good point. I hadn't seen the original article. I wish  
|someone that had would have said something about it. I don't know as that  
|would remove your responsibilty however for an unclear subject line.

	Wait. You just above said the subject line was logically
correct. If it's logically correct, it really can't be all that
unclear. Not to mention the fact that the only group that the subject
line was unclear in was r.m.synth.

|> I should also point out that I received no correspondence from anyone
|> objecting to the "Subject" line while the vote was taking place.

|That's because most people affected didn't know it was taking place.  
|(Circular argument).

	Oh well, tough noogies.

Cousin It                                  cuz@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu
"Do you regard the restroom wall as a private meeting?  No?  Why is a
                     newsgroup any different?"
- igb@fulcrum.bt.co.uk (Ian G Batten), 27 Mar 92, alt.censorship -
From: rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: misc.home.automation
Date: 13 Nov 1992 16:41:52 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx
NNTP-Posting-Host: crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu

In article <BxnGHr.F9p@uunet.uu.net>, CNTS12@email.mot.com (Mike Stevens) writes:
> I am inquiry regarding setting up a home automation user group.  I 
> periodically see information in consumers.house; however, that group takes 
> all issues as it relates to homes.

1)All of these topics can be handled quite well by misc.consumers.house. There
is not sufficient traffic to warrent a split of this topic. I do not support
the split


2) If you insist on going on with it, the name should be

	 misc.consumer.house.automation

we do not need another new second level hierarchy that duplicates an existing
newsgroup.

-- 
Richard H. Miller                 Email: rick@bcm.tmc.edu
Asst. Dir. for Technical Support  Voice: (713)798-3532
Baylor College of Medicine        US Mail: One Baylor Plaza, 302H
                                           Houston, Texas 77030
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy,rec.music.synth
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Music Group Reorg Disagreement (was Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored)
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:03:51 GMT

ksdavis@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Karleenus Schwartz Davis) writes:
>On the subject of a revote, I intended to ask Dave Hayes publicly
>whether he would actually accept the results of a revote if it didn't
>happen to go his way, but realized that personal questions are better
>relegated to email.  Unless, of course, the rest of you want to know.

I would accept the results of a revote. This person obviously has trouble
talking to me directly, because I have no email from this person. 

>did we fix it?"   Ok, now that we have the new group, if it's not
>broken (misnamed), why bother fixing it?  

I can argue for the fact that it is misnamed. Each other "makers"
group has a specific instrument as a topic. The r.m.s group actually
covered more than synths...it covered midi gear, software, interfaces,
effects units, etc. To put all this discussion in a "makers.synth"
group is to rob keyboard/synth/piano players from their own spot
as music makers...and to take away any chance of a forum for piano
and/or keyboard techniques and/or practice methods. 

>Settle in, and enjoy your
>new newsgroup, if you're lucky enough not be blocked by obstinate or
>lazy gateway maintainers.

Thanks a whole helluva lot. Now that a fair number of good people have 
left r.m.s altogether over the name change, now that the group is 
fragmented...thanks very much for "our new newsgroup"...oh great 
and mighty one. 

What else are you going to fuck up, while you're at it?

>of the message.  The subject line is only a clue, not a summary, and 
>its main usefulness is in keeping threads together.  

There are some clues that actually point to a topic of discussion, and
some that merely imply a loose relavence. If your idea of things is
"read this or else", that clue had better be good or you have no real
leg to stand on...other then a bunch of arbitrary rules
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

   It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: "BAD" music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 11:35:43 GMT

mckinzie@schaefer.math.wisc.edu (Mark McKinzie) writes:
>Anyone feel left out?

Lots of r.m.s readers and posters, I'd imagine.
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Join in the new game that's sweeping the country.  It's called "Bureaucracy".
Everybody stands in a circle.  The first person to do anything loses.
Xref: sparky news.groups:21312 news.admin:8492
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 12 Nov 92 04:22:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: jato.1992Nov12.042202.2822
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Distribution: usa
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA

stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>>Again this elitist attitude.
>Can you provide some PROOF that it is elitest to understand how USENET
>works? 

It's not elitist to know how it works, but it IS elitist to use that
as an indicator as to whether someone should participate in a decision
that affects them or not. 

>>I sure will deal with it...but not like you expect. 
>I am shaking in my boots .... er, shoes. What are you going to do, Dave?
>Talk us to death? Get our feeds cut? Sendsys bomb us? Your threats do
>nothing to help your case, they only show you to be a spoiled brat.

Give me a break, that wasn't a threat. No one's out to get you, John. 
There's just a matter of these guidelines that need to be changed...and
that's exactly how I'm going to deal with it. 

>>The fact of the name change is destroying the group. I didn't have to 
>>say anything for this to occur. The rumblings and unsubscribings were
>>happening before *I* got into this. 
>"Why, how DARE anyone rename my private little group where I want so
>much to read about MIDIs and synths. I will show them. I will... I
>will... I will STOP READING THE GROUP. Yeah. I guess that shows them!"

Like it or no, some people don't have the time to deal with net.politics.
It does cut off other noses when the person leaving has been a contributor for 
some time. I do not mind at all in redirecting this energy to a flamewar. 
In fact, I learn more and more from flamewars. 

>>By changing the name you are alienating
>>users away from the group. This is counter-productive and elitist. 
>Free clue: "we" are not renaming the group. The NET AS A WHOLE decided
>to rename the group. Everyone who cared enough to vote had a chance to
>vote. You voted. You lost. 

The net as a whole did not vote. A small vocal minority of the net voted.
When you show me more than 10000 votes (a small small fraction of the 
net readership) then I *might* begin to think that the net voted. 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Learn from the mistakes of others.  You don't have time to make them all yourself.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 20:38:16 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen):
>If there isn't a clear, enforcable way that people can be informed
>about the process and the critical things they need to know...

How in the universe do you intend to "enforce" education?

"Okay, buddy!  Up against the wall!  Now, read em!"
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
                 just another elitist Usenet administrator
Xref: sparky news.groups:20282 rec.music.synth:17718
From: barrett@astro.cs.umass.edu (Daniel Barrett)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:28:10 GMT
Reply-To: barrett@astro.cs.umass.edu (Daniel Barrett)
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: BLAZEMONGER INCORPORATED


	Come on, people.  It's just a name change.  It's not like anybody's
cancelling the group!!

	Newsgroups and their names are constantly being rearranged on USENET
in response to people's proposals and votes.  In fact, "rec.music.synth" WAS
NOT EVEN THE ORIGINAL NAME OF THIS GROUP, just for your information.

	To those people who complained they didn't know about the vote:
well, it was certainly announced.  I don't read news.groups, but I knew
about it.  In fact, enough r.m.s. people knew about it to kill the original
proposal, which was to rename the group to rec.music.makers.keyboard!

	The new name will not affect the subject matter discussed here one
bit.  So just keep on talking about whatever synth-related topics you like.
One day, your news software presumably will tell you that rec.music.synth
has disappeared, and rec.music.makers.synth has appeared, and you'll
subscribe.  Ho hum.

	Also, the name change is NOT the reason why the so-called "big guns"
of the group have not been posting recently.  Some of them just got tired
of reading USENET and decided to spend their time making music instead.

                                                        Dan

 //////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
| Dan Barrett -- Dept of Computer Science, Lederle Graduate Research Center |
| University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA  01003  --  barrett@cs.umass.edu |
 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////
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 00:42:11 GMT

In article <7775@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)  
writes:
> In article <1992Nov6.212720.2983@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com  
(Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
> >1) You (who seem to be pretty informed about net guidelines) forgot a  
> >portion of the guidelines. We're all only human.
> 
> ...and a fairly unimportant part, at that. I pay attention to every RFD  
and
> CFV I see. You would be well-advised to do so, as well.
>  
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.

> >2) Perhaps it's reasonable for a reader of a group to not know that ALL  
> >articles containing RFD or CFV in their subject line that are posted in  
a  
> >group affect that group (I'm not even certain this is actually the  
case,  
> >what with rampant cross-posting).
> 
> Not a chance. In particular, there's exactly one person responsible for
> cross-posting RFDs and CFVs: Dave Lawrence (tale@uunet.uu.net), the  
moderator
> of news.announce.newgroups. Dave does his job very well indeed, and only
> posts such articles to groups where the readers would be interested.  
There
> _is_ no "rampant cross-posting" of such articles.
> 
Seemingly several people that have spoken up were unaware of the policy.  
Even if you think this SHOULDN'T be the case, it is reasonable that  
someone would be unaware.

The cross-posting I meant (in this case) was cross-posting in general.  
People see many articles per day that are unrelated to their subject of  
interest. It's easy to become conditioned to that.

> >3) The subjects in the articles in question to r.m.s were sufficiently  
> >cryptic to the point where from the SUBJECT ITSELF you couldn't  
determine  
> >that the article dealt with r.m.s.
> 
> Hmph. Sorry, but I don't buy that. It's not that far a stretch for  
someone to
> saa "rec.music.makers reorg" and decide that it might just affect their  
group,
> ESPECIALLY IN A GROUP HAVING TO DO WITH MAKING MUSIC!!!!!!!
> (sheesh.)
> 
Well if it mentioned a group somewhere in the existing hierarchy of the  
group (like rec.music.*) it would have helped. I for one am not a music  
"maker".

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------