HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Give up, Dave, you've lost!
Date: 12 Dec 92 02:21:22 GMT
	<1992Dec10.231918.12285@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
	<1992Dec11.005616.27119@muddcs.claremont.edu>
	<1992Dec12.010008.7863@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central

DH> == Dave Hayes <dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>

 DH> But he would care if all of a sudden his traffic died, and not as many
 DH> people were out there as he'd known in the past. When he finds out that 
 DH> this is due to a newsgroup split, what's he going to do? If he complains
 DH> about it...he's flamed for being ignorant.

No, if he complains to me, I tell him he should be reading the new
group, and if he's not getting it, to ask his newsadmin.  (If, like
Gordon, he *is* his newsadmin, I'll try to help him get his feed
configuration fixed.)

 DH> If he'd known that this would happen, he'd have voted no. That's an
 DH> ignorance that doesn't get cured by reading some documentation.
 DH> That's an ignorance that comes from lack of experience.

And if he'd known that his newsadmin was going to be the holdout against
a vote that passed, well, he might have felt like he was back at
Princeton during the sf reorg.  :)
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.culture.native-america
Date: 14 Dec 92 21:49:36 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

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

>In article <adams.723921888@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>
>>StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl) writes:
>>
>>>Unfortunately, "Amerindian" is a misnomer.  The native people of the
>>>American continents are NOT related to the people of the Indian 
>>>subcontinent.
>>
>>True enough.  But 'native' is not good, either.  I am a native.  I was born
>>here.  The same thing went round and round last time.
>
>You are a native of this country, but not a "Native American" in the
>colloquial sense.  I don't know of anyone who refers to themselves as
>"Native American" who does not have a fair portion of Cherokee or
>Navajo (or some such) blood in them.

As I said the first time this went around a while ago, the issue is that
the use 'native american' implies that all others are simply interlopers
who do not belong here.  While the politically correct types might believe
that, it is a moot point now.

 -Steve
--
  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                         -------------------
   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: Rename rec.music.maker.synth to rec.music.synth?
Date: 14 Dec 1992 16:10:36 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Dec14.135238.8814@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>Would you ask him to email me? I'd be curious what the real reason
>for the disconnection is...the original owner told me something
>about being tired of name changes.

How can he be tired of something that's only happened once, ever?
-- 
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.
  "All [Windows] NT has is a lot of journalists fooled." -- Brian Button
From: murphy@npri6.npri.com (David P. Murphy)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: DAVE HAYES IS NOTHING BUT A GRANDSTANDER
Date: 16 Dec 92 02:56:27 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: NPRI, Alexandria VA

>>>>Is it your contention that professional keyboardists are simply
>>>>too damned dumb?
>>>>
>>>>(attribution lost, possibly jay maynard)

>Well...it was your implication.
>
>dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)

he was implying that _you_ think the readers are dumb.

>And the user hits 'n' because there's nothing that interests them
>apparent on the first page.

well then, if they act like that, then they _are_ dumb, aren't they?

your argument about not "capturing their interest within a certain number
of lines" is the lamest swill you've yet generated --- the person running
the vote is most likely a sys-admin, not a magazine editor.
if someone hands me a birthday card which i toss without opening
because the cover is not very funny, then i have only myself to blame
when she asks me how i spent the $50 inside the card, don't i?

you really do think that anyone reading a rec.music.* group must have
the computer-literacy of a tree squirrel, don't you?

tell me, dave, why do you think the readers did not vote?  i know, i know,
"it was not obvious" and "CFV can stand for lots of things", calm down.
i would like to know _why_ you are so sure that the vote was skewed.
i don't want to hear about the tragedies of being disconnected from SYNTH-L
or the guy who can't find a job because he's lost r.m.s. or whatever,
i want to know how many of _your_ users have bitched about the name change
(without any prompting from you).  why haven't we heard from _them_?
are you <gasp> being elitist by presuming to speak for them without
actually obtaining their opinion . . . or are you so sure what they think
that you don't need to ask?

ok
dpm
-- 
murphy@npri6.npri.com 602 Cameron St. Alexandria, VA 22314 (703) 683-9090

              When every one is dead the Great Game is finished.  Not before.
                              --- Hurree Babu, "Kim"
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.motss
From: asente@adobe.com (A Usenet Pal)
Subject: Re: Soc.Motss.* (was Re: new newsgroup proposal:talk.politics.motss)
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 06:55:05 GMT

Here's a thought.  Many people seem to believe that crossposting is the root
of many of soc.motss's ills.  How about making soc.motss a moderated
newsgroup with an auto-moderator -- a program that takes submissions and
posts them all, but removes any cross-posting?  If someone posted something
to soc.motss and anything else, the auto-moderator would send out the article
twice -- once to soc.motss and once to all the other newsgroups.

It could work.

      -paul asente
	   asente@adobe.com   ...decwrl!adobe!asente   moo-bear@cs.stanford.edu

They called up to Alice, who, having put on an ingeniously constructed
bathing slip, met them in the pool.
Xref: sparky news.groups:24540 soc.culture.europe:10540 soc.culture.soviet:11187 soc.culture.nordic:7933 talk.politics.soviet:9787
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.europe,soc.culture.soviet,soc.culture.nordic,talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.culture.baltic/balticum
Date: 17 Dec 92 10:37:20 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Enea Data AB

Note: I have included the groups that got the RFD in this posting,
since there have been some discussion in at least talk.politics.soviet.
However, please observe that the forum for discussions on group
creation is news.groups, and I have redirected followups to this group.

There have been some objections against the name soc.culture.baltic.
Personally I don't find these objections very valid, however since
they come from persons with interest in the topic I cannot ignore
them if I am anxious to see the group pass the vote.

Basically the objections have been on two lines:

1) "Baltic" would include Finns, Ingrians, Votians and other Baltic
    Finnish peoples even they don't live what we commonly mean with
    the Baltics.

2)  There is no common Baltic culture. Estonia is a mainly protestant
    country and Lithuania mainly Catholic, so therefore they are
    different.

The counter-argument to 1) is that common English usage of "Baltic" in
terms of countries are Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The counter-argument
to 2) is groups like soc.culture.africa, soc.culture.europe or why not
soc.culture.soviet. Or why not BALT-L.

Nevertheless, as a group champion I have to take all objections that
might cause the group to fail in account.

This far I can recall five possibilities mentioned:
1) soc.culture.baltic
2) soc.culture.baltics
3) soc.culture.balticum
4) soc.culture.baltic-states
5) talk.politics.baltic(s)

Of these I will not support 3 or 5. 3 because it is plainly not English.
And 5 since I am looking for a group with a broader scope than just a
political. Also, talk.politics.baltic is in the can, since such a proposal
was included in the great talk.politics.* reorginazation less than six
months ago.

I would like those who have an opinion on this matter, mail me your
preferences and anti-preferences from the list above. New proposals
are welcome. With the basis from the input I get, I will pick a name
for the Call for Votes due to appear January 7th. You may post as
well, however when looking for numbers I will only look in my mailbox.
Note that this is an informal poll and not strict science.

Finally, some persons have asked for at least a one-way gateway from
BALT-L. I think that this is likely to happen, but I don't want to
make the arrangement part of the vote - after all, that's things that
can be arranged later.
-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
From: emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RESULT: comp.society.folklore unmoderation fails 729:151
Date: 17 Dec 1992 05:52:42 GMT
Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, Michigan
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.msen.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Jay Maynard (jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu) wrote:

: I guess I'll have to sit in my sandbox. You won't let me into yours.
: After all, we have fascist admins who won't accept alt as a part of the
: Natural Order Of Things. :-/ (note: I don't think my admins are fascists...)

Jay, if you are really interested in reading alt.folklore.computers,
there are several opportunities open to you.

First is to find some new news admins who will take on groups one at a time.

Second is to find a public access site that carries it and read it from there.

Third is to find any site that carries it and have them mail it to you,
then use procmail or deliver to separate it out of your mailbox and into
a local newsgroup.

Fourth is to buy Usenet on CD-ROM and read up on all of the back traffic
you have missed.

Fifth is to change places of employment or schooling to one with a more
enlightened news feed.

Sixth is to find an open NNTP server and catch it from there.

Seventh is to read it through a gopher-to-netnews gateway.

Eighth is to run news on your own computers and beg, borrow, or purchase
a news feed.

In any case these are efforts which you can take on individually, on
your own initiative, and that you anyone with even a small amount of
talent, money, creativity, or stubbornness (pick one) can do.  I would
guess that you are more than up to doing it.  None of them would require
anyone else's consent - just go and read the group!

  Edward Vielmetti, vice president for research, Msen Inc. emv@Msen.com
        Msen Inc., 628 Brooks, Ann Arbor MI  48103 +1 313 998 GLOB

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: STRAW VOTE ON NAME FOR NATIVE AMERICANS NEWSGROUP
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
	<Bz397K.I7B@polaris.async.vt.edu>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 17:37:39 GMT

In article <Bz397K.I7B@polaris.async.vt.edu> jfurr@polaris.async.vt.edu (Joel Furr) writes:

   I'd suggest the following as possible names, with people of course
   being free to suggest others:

   soc.culture.native
   soc.culture.native.american (recognizing that there is no soc.culture.native
				group for this to hang under at present)
   soc.culture.amerind
   soc.culture.native-america
   soc.culture.indigenous
   soc.culture.???

I still favor "soc.culture.aboriginal[.american]," absent any
objections from the new group proponents.  I submit it as an addition
to the straw poll choices.

"Aboriginal" clearly distinguishes between the original occupants of
the land and other (largely European) "natives" who came later.  It is
apparently in frequent use in Canadian media in preference to
"Indian."

If the new group proponents agree to open the group to aboriginal
issues in geographical areas other than the Americas, as some have
suggested, then use "soc.culture.aboriginal."  Otherwise,
"soc.culture.aboriginal.american."

Reactions?
-- 
Ed McGuire                   1603 LBJ Freeway, Suite 780
Systems Administrator/       Dallas, Texas 75234
 Member of Technical Staff   214/620-2100, FAX 214/484-8110
Intellection, Inc.           <ed@intellection.com>
From: murphy@npri6.npri.com (David P. Murphy)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: no, it's NOT an obscure point
Date: 11 Dec 92 15:03:37 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: NPRI, Alexandria VA

>>[discussion of "help ensure" deleted]

>Here we go, a good suggestion and what does it get. Pedantic criticism
>on obscure points of English semantics. Sigh.
>
>ross-c@scs.leeds.ac.uk

when debating a point, it would be optimal if all parties involved completely
understand what the other point is saying.  this is especially vital in
a purely non-verbal,non-somatic content such as the net, in which gestures
and tones of voice do not exist.  therefore, most _serious_ posters place
a high premium on accuracy of the written word in an effort to increase the 
comprehension on the part of the readers.  they also strive to enstill
this premium in other posters, so that threads can be "discussions"
instead of "flamewars" (fun though the latter may be).

attributing the name to the correct quote is also important for the
same reason:  since we lack voices, we rely upon names to determine
_who_ said _what_.  without proper attribution, it becomes difficult
to build an image of a poster's philosophy, which of course is necessary
if one wishes to debate a point rationally.

i trust i have made this clear, ross-c.  you are invited to continue
this subject via e-mail if you have any questions.

ok
dpm
-- 
murphy@npri6.npri.com 602 Cameron St. Alexandria, VA 22314 (703) 683-9090

              When every one is dead the Great Game is finished.  Not before.
                              --- Hurree Babu, "Kim"
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL:  Yes votes >= 200+2*No Votes
Date: 12 Dec 92 00:47:30 GMT
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC

In article <1992Dec10.174347.17435@midway.uchicago.edu> greg@dent.uchicago.edu (Greg Kuperberg) writes:
> Therefore I PROPOSE that the protocol for a call for votes be changed
> so that in the future, yes votes must exceed twice no votes by 200 votes
> before a newsgroup is created. In other words,

> Y >= 200+2*N

I can not disagree more strongly. If we're going to change the voting
guidelines, let us change them so they better match the needs of the net.

There is no correlation between Yes and No. Just because a group is popular
doesn't mean it should pass against massive opposition. I propose that the
guidelines be changed:

	Y >= 100 (or 200 or whatever you want)
	N <= 50 (or 100 or whatever you want)

That is, if more than 50 (100, ...) people oppose a group, there is probably
something sufficiently wrong with the group that it should not pass no matter
how many ballots are handed in. I have observed in the past that if a group
gets more than just a few NO votes it's probably going to fail anyway, and the
groups that have passed despite this sort of opposition have been mostly
found to be mistakes.

In addition, I would like to suggest that multi-way votes be allowed. The
simplest form would be:

	Vote for one or more of the following names, or NO GROUP:

		foo.bar
		rec.foo.bar
		sci.aquaria.bar
		NO GROUP

The criteria for winning would be:

	If NO GROUP gets >50 (100) votes, the group fails.
	Otherwise, if one or more groups get >100 (200) groups,
		the group passes, with the group name being the group
		with the most votes.
	Otherwise, the group fails.

More complicated mechanisms for choosing the name can be used, so long
as they are no more liberal than this.
-- 
%Peter da Silva/77487-5012 USA/+1 713 274 5180/Have you hugged your wolf today?
/L{lineto}def/C{curveto}def/F{0 562 moveto 180 576 324 648 396 736 C 432 736 L
482 670 518 634 612 612 C}def/G{setgray}def .75 G F 612 792 L 0 792 L fill 1 G
324 720 24 0 360 arc fill 0 G 3 setlinewidth F stroke showpage % "Peerless"
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: clements@carson.u.washington.edu (Steve Clements)
Subject: Re: RFD: talk.politics.patriot
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:43:46 GMT

>In article <1gjc0uINN2qa@news.UU.NET>, brians@atlastele (Brian Sheets) writes:
>>I would like to propose a newsgroup for the patriot movement in the U.S.
>>This would include discussions on rights violations by legislation, gold 
>>and silver as payment for debts, freedom organizations and many other basic 
>>US Constitutional topics.
>
Why not call it talk.politics."patriot-nudge-nudge-wink-wink-:)" ???
You could all stroke each other with talk of Oliver North and Ronald
Reagan and other great "patriots" (nudge-nudge-wink-wink)! You might
want to include .usa in the group title, but that would by no means
exclude other great American "patriots" (nudge-nudge-wink-wink) such as
Ferdinand Marcos and the Shah of Iran and the Somozas of Nicaragua and ....
From: BAV2@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.physics.research moderated
Date: 17 Dec 92 14:54:02 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

In a recent aricle Matt Austern proposes to create a moderate group
for a professional discussion of physics. A lot of such proposals
was on net. I think it is high time to do so.

-Boris Veytsman
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.native
From: gst@spdcc.com (Gary S. Trujillo)
Subject: Re: How about soc.culture.america.tribal?
Reply-To: gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us (Gary S. Trujillo)
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:58:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.105028.1@wharton.upenn.edu>
	millerl@wharton.upenn.edu writes:

> As soc.culture.native can apply to anybody who is a citizen of any
> country anywhere in the world, I think we can reject that name.

Not quite so easily, methinks.  An individual person may be native to a
particular continent, but there is a group of peopleS (meaning groups
or societies) which *are* native, and others which are not.  Those peoples
referred to as American Indians, Native Hawaiians, the First Peoples of
Canada, and the First Peoples of the South American countries *are* native,
while those which have immigrated in the past several hundred years are not.
It's a matter of time-scale, I think.  The "Native" peoples have been here
(in what are now the Americas) for THOUSANDS of years, not hundreds, giving
those PEOPLES (not "people" - which refers to individuals) a unique claim
to being native, since their societies were the first human societies in
these lands.

> Likewise, as soc.culture.america.native applies to anybody who lives in
> north or south america and holds citizenship in their country, it is
> also overly general.

As there has been only one proposal for "soc.culture.america.native," with
no support received that I recall, I don't think we need to discuss that
idea.  However, I do agree with this statement, and see it as an additional
reason not to seriously consider that name.  (I see a big difference between
the term "American native" and "Native American," BTW.)

> I think the key is to point out the cultural
> patterns of the group you want to bring together, and choose a name
> around that. The peoples called american indian tribes can be
> differentiated from the caucasian american peoples by a simple fact, the
> caucasians tend to cluster in cities and to take identity from
> geographic boundaries, and the "indians" tend to live outside of cities
> and draw identity from tribe and clan affiliation.

I think that's a rather superficial observation and an accidental distinction.
The term "tribal" is much disliked by many American Indian people, primarily on
the grounds that it is, like most terms which have become accepted by scholars
and lay-folks alike, invented by non-Native people.

> If the group is only for tribal peoples of the american continents, then
> soc.culture.america.tribal would be the most appropriate name. If it is
> for tribal peoples all over the world, then soc.culture.tribal would be
> most appropriate.

The newsgroup node "soc.culture.america" has received no support, so I think
it is safe to dismiss any idea based on the premise of that name.

> Comments?

As above.

Gary
-- 
    Gary S. Trujillo                             gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us
Somerville, Massachusetts               {wjh12,bu.edu,spdcc,ima,cdp}!gnosys!gst
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.culture.baltic/balticum
Date: 15 Dec 92 23:20:28 GMT
Organization: Enea Data AB

Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews) writes:
>sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes:
>
>>I'm doubtful to this. My Swedish-English dictionary gives
>>"The Baltic States" for "Baltikum". That is, "balticum" looks
>>suspiciously Swenglish to me. Native speakers out there, is
>>really "Balticum" used in English?
>
>I've never heard it used in English over in this hemisphere.
>
>>It is my impression that Baltic in contemporary English is used
>>for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, and maybe the Kaliningrad
>>area too.
>
>I have never heard "Baltic" refer to Kaliningrad (except when used in
>the very broad sense mentioned below).  Mostly it is used to mean only
>Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia.  Occasionally, I have heard it used to
>refer to all 9 countries around the Baltic Sea (plus Norway, too); but
>in such a case it is carefully qualified to indicate that it is being
>given a broader than normal usage.  And, of course, it is used to refer
>to the Sea itself.
>
>>Of course, soc.culture.baltics could be an alternative.
>
>Baltic versus Baltics makes no difference to me.  Existing soc.culture
>groups seem to be about evenly split between adjectives and nouns, so
>s.c.baltic and s.c.baltics both seem to fit in.  But we must decide and
>be clear about it -- we shouldn't end up with a fiasco such as s.c.india
>versus s.c.indian.
>
>    Richard M. Mathews			 Freedom for Lithuania
>Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM		        Laisve!


-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Give up, Dave, you've lost!
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 13:57:26 GMT

jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>This is a Dave Hayes tactic: refer to your mailbox...never mind that it's
>completely unverifiable as a source of data for an argument.

Hey, I didn't originate this one.

>I'm a nice guy, on the scale of the net.

That's not saying much.
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Compassion will cure more sins than condemnation.
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.config,alt.folklore.computers