HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: news@wolves.uucp (The Wolfe of the Den)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.motorcycles,alt.motorcycles.harley,alt.culture.usenet
Subject: Flame war history (was: rec.motorcycles.harley vote acknowledgment)
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:46:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: wolves.1992Aug21.154652.5212
Followup-To: news.groups,alt.culture.usenet
Organization: Wolves Den UNIX
X-Md4-Signature: 81991709ceae44fa25ffd966a45282cc

<1992Aug19.200237.27650@i88.isc.com> jeq@i88.isc.com (Jonathan E. Quist) writes:
><Bt8Lww.2vx@rice.edu> cathyf@is.rice.edu (Catherine Anne Foulston) writes:
>
>>. . . . , I'm just
>>hoping this flame war will go away soon, but after three years on the
>>net you'd think I'd turn pessimist and give up hoping stuff like that
>>wouldn't you?
>
>What, give up after only 3 years?  Flame wars have been around since
>USENET was just a collection of PDP-11's with modems.  Not likely
>they'll ever go away.

	Actually, the first flame war erupted within the first two
months after the net was established.  The topic was a "halt"
instruction in the boot sequence of an early BSD tape.

	The 2nd flame war was over some poor twits unintentional
apparent put down of women in computing (by saying "even my sister hacks
computers for a living.")   The second flamewar resulted in the first
gagging of a poster for inappropriate posting.  [It *was* unintentional,
I swear it was! :-)   ]

	After the second flamewar, I don't think there has been more
than a few hours when there was NOT a flame fest going on somewhere on
the net.  As one wound down and "ended", another would start up or
intensify in some other group.

	The traffic at that point was exclusively uucp and modems, but
it was only anothter few weeks until someone had patched together a
"uucp over tcp/ip" package to carry traffic over the ARPAnet.

	This was within weeks of the A-version being distributed at the
Winter 1980 Usenix Conference in January 1980.

	[Followups to news.groups and alt.culture.usenet]
-- 
Usenet Net News Administrator @ The Wolves Den  (G. Wolfe Woodbury)
news%wolves@cs.duke.edu     ...duke!wolves!news     "We don't need no
There is a real person who watches this account.   stinking disclaimers"
From: dseal@armltd.co.uk (David Seal)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RESULT: soc.culture.indian.telugu passes 388: 103
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:43:28 GMT
Distribution: news
Organization: A.R.M. Ltd, Swaffham Bulbeck, Cambs, UK

In article <3276@creatures.cs.vt.edu> juvvadi@csgrad.cs.vt.edu (Ramana R.
Juvvadi) writes:

>In article <1992Aug10.195411.23600@mtu.edu> avshrotr@mtu.edu (Ashish (the one and only) Shrotriya) writes:
>>
>>     SOC.CULTURE.INDIAN.TELUGU PASSES    388 : 103
>
><stuff deleted>
>>
>>My "No" vote bounced back.
>
>Do usenet's guidelines say anything about bounced votes? Of course,
>in this case it doesn't make any difference. What happens if the
>margin were very narrow and somebody complains that his vote has 
>bounced. Inquiring minds want to know.
>
>Thanks,
>Ramana

More or less, the situation about bounced votes is that it is *your* job to
get the email through. If you don't do so, the vote-taker is not responsible
for it. This may seem unfair to you as a voter, but anything else is very
unfair to the vote-taker - how on earth can he be responsible for ensuring a
vote gets through when he doesn't even know about the vote's existence? You
at least know that the vote bounced and can try sending it again, possibly
using different routes, etc.

The same is also the case about votes that disappear somewhere in the email
system - i.e. neither being delivered nor bounced. In this case, you are
able to determine that it has happened because you don't get an individual
acknowledgement and your name doesn't appear on a mass acknowledgement.
Again, you can (and should) take remedial action; the vote-taker doesn't
even know that something has gone wrong...

David Seal
dseal@armltd.co.uk

All opinions are mine only...
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap)
Subject: Re: Spaf & Dave Lawrence?  (was Re: 3-week discussion period? (was: RFM: rec.arts.erotica))
Organization: AS&M Inc
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 19:28:53 GMT

In article <0105011F.atoquh@dragon.enigami.mv.com> cory@enigami.mv.com (Cory Kempf) writes:

   Instead of bothering them with a herd of people questioning them,
   I wanted to boil things down to a (small) list of questions for them
   (I assume that they have better thing to do than get involved with
   usenet flame wars!).

   Here is what I thought of:


	   There is a discussion going on in news.groups about removing the
	   moderator of a group and replacing him with another.  (There is
	   some dissatisfaction with the performance of the current moderator.)

	   Is there a specified proceedure for changing moderators?
	   Assuming that there is no specific proceedure in place,
		   do you have any objections to the using the existing
		   RFD/CFV mechanism?

I think Dave has already answered this and Jonathan has repeated it:
The Guidelines specifically state that they are for group creations only.
But that can be changed if the net.consensus favors it.

   That way, instead of us trying to figure out what they might do, we
   can get a direct answer.  Comments?

Go for it.

Looking through posts I've saved, I find spaf@cs.purdue.edu, and of
course Dave's full address is tale@uunet.uu.net.
--
J Lee Jaap <jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov> +1 804/864-2148
employed by, not speaking for, AS&M Inc, at NASA LaRC, Hampton VA 23681
From: ldr@merrymeeting.mv.com (Lee D. Rothstein)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: News group on network and distrib sys mgmt?
Distribution: world
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 16:18:11 GMT
Organization: New Science Associates, Inc; IEEE Computer Society, NH
Reply-To: ldr@merrymeeting.mv.com

Netlanders,

Is there a news group devoted to network and distributed systems
management?  If there isn't, I'm interested in doing a RFG
(Request for Group).  How would I go about doing that?

Thanks,

Lee

  /-------------------------------------------------------\
 /Lee D. Rothstein                             603-424-2900\
/ New Science Associates, Inc.            Fax: 603-424-8549 \
\ 7 Merrymeeting Drive       Email: ldr@merrymeeting.mv.com /
 \Merrimack, NH 03054-2934        IEEE Computer Society, NH/
  \-------------------------------------------------------/
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: rthomson@mesa.dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.graphics.gnuplot
Reply-To: rthomson@dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson)
Organization: Design Systems Division, Evans & Sutherland, SLC, UT
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 20:32:27 GMT

In article <BszFpw.16G@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
	d-lewart@uiuc.edu (Daniel S. Lewart) writes:
>Should the group be named `comp.apps.gnuplot' or `comp.graphics.gnuplot'?

Comp.apps.gnuplot -- I think we've set a bad precedent by having
comp.graphics.explorer and comp.graphics.avs; I recall others also
arguing for a generic 'apps' hierarchy instead of lumping things under
their problem domain.  For instance, should we have
sci.math.mathematica or comp.apps.mathematica?  Now that I think about
it, I would probably prefer apps.mathematica.

						-- Rich
-- 
	Repeal the personal income tax; vote Libertarian in 1992.
Disclaimer: I speak for myself, except as noted; Copyright 1992 Rich Thomson
UUCP: ...!uunet!dsd.es.com!rthomson			Rich Thomson
Internet: rthomson@dsd.es.com	IRC: _Rich_		PEXt Programmer
From: atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Randall Atkinson)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.aeronautics.airliners
Date: 20 Aug 92 01:11:33 GMT
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, DC

I oppose the group being in the sci.* heirarchy.
I would not oppose it if it were under rec.*

  It is best if sci.* is kept to strictly hard-core technical
discussions.  The few cases where it currently isn't are generally
disasters and its best to avoid this sort of thing for all potential
future cases.  Remember sci.aquaria !
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: STRAW POLL: changing a moderator
Summary: comments on new questions...
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:47:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: desire.1992Aug14.104719.3461
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <JIK.92Aug13214909@pit-manager.mit.edu>, jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) writes:
...
> Those of you who haven't been following the discussion in news.groups
> should know that daemon@desire.wright.edu is very strongly on one side
> of the main issue being discussed, i.e., he believes that the current
> guidelines are sufficient.  I believe that the questions he has chosen
> in his poll are biased by this fact.  I am on the other side of the
> debate, and I therefore chose to add these two questions to my
> response to his poll:

	Well, I thought my intro made that plain enough :).  One question I
should also have asked was "Are you presently a sysadmin at your site?" to
gauge sysadmin levels of support/non support for each position.

	[questions removed, but only for space considerations]

> (Incidentally, I believe that demon's poll distorts the issue
> significantly, since it implies that whether or not it should be
> possible to replace a moderator or unmoderate a group is something
> about which there has been disagreement.  In fact, no one has argued,
> throughout the entire discussion, that it should not be possible to
> replace a moderator or unmoderate a group, and I doubt anyone believes
> that.  The only real issue, throughout the discussion, has been
> whether or not the current guidelines are sufficient.  I suggest you
> keep that in mind if you respond to this poll.)

	That is the point of the poll.  The additional questions are for
statistical completeness.  "N people who think that moderator changes should be
done feel the guidelines are adequate", etc.

	Feel free to add questions to the poll.  It'll make counting messy, but
that's what SAS is for :).

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: weber@rhrk.uni-kl.de (Christoph Weber-Fahr [KIT])
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: guidelines for moderator replacement
Date: 14 Aug 92 18:01:12 GMT
Organization: University of Kaiserslautern, Germany

bac@netcom.com (Brian Court) writes:

>In article <JIK.92Aug9200017@pit-manager.mit.edu> jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) writes:
>>
>>1) Person proposing to replace moderator posts request for a straw
>>poll to see if there is enough dissatisfaction to do it.
>>
>>2) Votes are counted.
>>
>>3) If there is not enough dissatisfaction to proceed, the process ends
>>here.

This is difficult to formalize. What about that: 

"
A RfM may be posted

- With agreement of the moderator by everyone
- Against the moderator's will by at least 50 persons

A RfM MUST contain a suggestion for an alternative moderator inclusive
his or her agreement to to that job.

The 50 persons must be reachable by mail and listed in the RfM .
"
This way it is prevented that one bozo constantly harasses a moderator
by RfM's.

>>4) An official request for discussion is posted.  A copy is mailed to
>>the moderator whose replacement is being discussed.
>>
>>5) A regular discussion period ensues.  If, at the end of the
>>discussion period, no one is willing to run as a possible replacement
>>for the current moderator, the process ends here.
>>
>>6) A vote is held.  At least 100 more yes than no votes, and at least
>>2/3 yes votes, must be collected in order for the moderator to be
>>replaced.
>>

>I think jik's proposed guidelines are pretty good, but I'd offer a
>couple of small suggestions:

>1.  I'd like to see a 'preliminary-RFD' phase before the straw
>poll, in which the reasons for the dissatisfaction with the moderator
>can be aired.  This would also provide an opportunity for sour-grapes
>complaints to be shouted down.  

A good idea, but I think it would complicate the preocess.

>2.  We'd better define what "enough dissatisfaction to do it" means.
>A majority of those responding to the straw poll?  More than, say,
>fifty dissatisfied readers?

...willing openly to subscribe a "Request for [a new] Moderator"

>3.  The purpose of the 100-vote rule for new group creation
>is to discourage the creation of small-readership groups that
>would be better served by a mailing list, is it not?  Since in this case
>the group already exists, I'm not sure what the benefit of 
>retaining this clause is. 

Leave it where it is. There are groups on the net who might have problems 
to mobilize their users for a vote. In such cases a 20:10 vote
could change a widely accepted moderator. This issue is yet problematic 
enough without putting down the usual barriers.

Regards

Christoph Weber-Fahr
-- 
  Christoph Weber-Fahr                  |  E-Mail:  weber@rhrk.uni-kl.de 
  Universitaet Kaiserslautern,  KIT     |  S-Mail:  Postfach 3049
  Tel. 0631/205-3391                    |           D-6750 Kaiserslautern
--------------------------  My personal opinion only    ---------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap)
Subject: Re: Time for a formal RFD on mass rmgrping?
Organization: AS&M Inc
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 15:35:11 GMT

In article <16c3ooINN7l@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> aryeh@cash.ucsc.edu (Aryeh Friedman) writes:

   We seem to have come to some agreement.  Mr. Cline seems to have the best
   basic purposal, which is somekind of CFR (Call for Removal), all we need to
   do it is set the procerural rules for how do a CFR.  I agree with the person
   who said RFD's are needed.  One last note the CFM (Call for change in Moderator)
   seems to be a different issue so a seprate RFD is needed. So in short should I
   draft a formal RFD and post it here and to news.announce.newgroups. Also, please
   tell me if there are any other groups that it should be posted to.

According to the Guidelines, as Jonathan Kamens <jik@mit.edu> has
quoted them in the CFM discussion, they are to be used only for group
creation.  Any other action needs to be preceded by a change of the
Guide<ZAP!#*@$> (no, this is not the USENET Olympics, as narrated in
other posts, so I can say it -- a change of the Guidelines :-P).  To
do that we have to convince Gene Spafford (I think he's the keeper)
that the changes have the support of the net, and that's through
discussion.  Then the Guidelines are changed; then we can have a CFR
(which Dave Lawrence will accept for n.a.ng, which most newsadmins
will accept).

If you follow this, formulate a specific change to the Guidelines,
post it here for discussion.  If discussion indicates net-wide
general consensus, submit them to Spaf, which I expect he'll
accept if there are no fundamental flaws, then after incorporation
into the Guidelines, proceed with the CFR.

Good luck.  I think it's in the best interest of the net to
have a CFR procedure.

--
J Lee Jaap <jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov> +1 804/864-2148
employed by, not speaking for, AS&M Inc, at NASA LaRC, Hampton VA 23681
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.motorcycles
From: gwh@soda.berkeley.edu (George William Herbert)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: guidelines for moderator replacement
Date: 14 Aug 1992 03:42:03 GMT
Organization: Dis-
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
Summary: One Clarification... n.a.ng not for Straw polls says Tale...

In article <JAAPJL.92Aug13152129@cmb00.larc.nasa.gov> jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap) writes:
>I think Jonathan was proposing this as a *formal* step in the CFM
>procedure.  Thus the CFSP would be posted to n.a.ng and any related
>groups.  Dave's approval would be sufficient to get it posted to
>the other moderated group.  (Only the first moderated group in
>the Newsgroups list requires an Approved: line, as I understand;
>I've never read the RFC.)

	One point: I origionally posted the (now canceled and moot)
Straw poll to news.announce.newgroups and was informed by Tale
that straw polls have never been accepted in n.a.ng, so I reposted
it with n.a.ng out of the newsgroups list.
	

-george william herbert
gwh@soda.berkeley.edu  gwh@lurnix.com  herbert@uchu.isu92.ac.jp until 28 aug
From: boubaker@cenatls.cena.dgac.fr (Heddy Boubaker)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: several instrument-specific rec.music groups
Date: 20 Aug 92 07:43:45 GMT
Organization: Centre d'Etudes de la Navigation Aerienne
Originator: boubaker@bendy


 Lets go on:

 rec.music.sax         |
 rec.music.trumpet     | rec.music.wind-instruments
 rec.music.flute       |
 rec.music...          |

 rec.music.drums       |
 rec.music.percussions | rec.music.rythm-instruments
 rec.music.maracas :-) |
 rec.music.triangle:-) |
 rec.music...          |

 rec.music.keyboard.piano
 rec.music.keyboard.synth

 rec.music.violin

 and so on...


 /----------------------------------------------------------------------\
 |         B O U B A K E R    H e d d y             | ())()((())))()(() |
 |                  [  C.E.N.A  ]                   | ) ~~~ | ~~~~~  )) |
 | Centre  d ' Etudes  de  la  Navigation  Aerienne | (--O--|---O----() |
 | 7 , av Edouard BELIN                             | #     L_       #  |
 |                         31 055 TOULOUSE (FRANCE) |  #  ######    #   |
 | Phone: (+33) 62-25-95-22  Fax: (+33) 62-25-95-99 |   ##(----)#  #    |
 | InTerNet:    BOUBAKER@dgac.fr                    |    ## ### ##      |
 \----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap)
Subject: Re: changing a newsgroup's moderator
Organization: AS&M Inc
	<1992Aug11.233715.25552@athena.mit.edu>
	<1992Aug12.162514.3405@desire.wright.edu>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:52:52 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.162514.3405@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:

	   Stop being an asshole, Jonathan.  You know as well as I do that when
   someone tries to do another RFD before the six months is up that a majority of
   the readers say "we just did that, forget it" and it never happens.

Jonathan is merely reading the letter of the Guidelines, which we
ostensibly use.

	   I expected someone who is a moderator to do their best to defeat the
   installation of a moderator removal process, but try not to be too blatent
   about it.

Au contraire.  He has done more to propose it than anyone.  He listed
the original draft of the change to the Guidelines.

	   The truth is you have no valid reason to reject the RFD/CFV process for
   removing moderators.

Dave Lawrence rejected the RFD, not Jonathan.  Dave judged that the
Guidelines do not cover CFMs.

--
J Lee Jaap <jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov> +1 804/864-2148
employed by, not speaking for, AS&M Inc, at NASA LaRC, Hampton VA 23681
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: steve@bucolix.ncsu.edu (Steve Garnier)
Subject: Re: rec.motorcycles.harley vote acknowledgment
Reply-To: steve@bucolix.ece.ncsu.edu (Steve Garnier)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:19:42 GMT

In article <520@alden.UUCP> sgr@alden.UUCP (Stan Ryckman) writes:
>In article <1992Aug20.160100.29390@ncsu.edu>
>steve@bucolix.ece.ncsu.edu (Steve Garnier) writes:
>>I'm glad that you, too, have been able to ID Furr@cup.portal.com as being
>>a differnet person that FURRJK@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU Joel Furr.
>   ^^^^^^^^^
>Hey, I like it!  A new word, and quite appropriate!

I saw this typo, and for the first time in my life, decided to keep it in 
the article.  I also thought it was appropriate as both a descriptor and 
a subtle pun.  Congratulations!  You're the first to receive public 
recognition for noticing it!  :-)

Steve Garnier - DoD #00000005 - '79 XS1100SF w/ 157K+ miles and *climbing*
KotF (Flame),  KotAM (Anecdotal Motorcycle),  The Daemon's Byte
       Contrary to popular belief, I am not the Devil's advocate...
                  ...but I am his speech writer.
Xref: sparky news.groups:16933 rec.motorcycles:27650 rec.motorcycles.racing:970 rec.motorcycles.dirt:1339
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.motorcycles,rec.motorcycles.racing,rec.motorcycles.dirt
Subject: Re: rec.motorcycles.harley vote acknowledgment
Date: 18 Aug 1992 00:52:03 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Aug17.202649.19552@ncsu.edu> steve@bucolix.ece.ncsu.edu (Steve Garnier) writes:
>I think it's sad that
>some individuals fear they have so much to lose/gain, that they will stoop 
>to "the ends justifies the means."

I think it's sad that some folks have to react to the death of their pipe
dream by hollering "CHEATERS!!!".

>If you want to know who they are, just peruse the list below, where I've
>delineated *SUSPECTED* cheats.  You might be surprised.  Some people don't
>even cheat *well*.  At least it's *FINALLY* over.  :-)

Geez. Paranoid, aren't we?...

>   ---A List Of Suspected Ballot-Box Stuffers---
> CAD8025@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca "Problem Reporting, A" 
> ACAD8059@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca Mike Mychalkiw 
> ADVI8721@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca advisor's utility disk 

What's wrong with three folks from the same site voting for the issue? Oh, you
mean to imply that they're really the same person? A little email goes a lot
farther than public accusations.
 
> FURRJK@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU Joel Furr 
> Furr@cup.portal.com 

Just how many Furrs are there in the US? For that matter, why should Joel Furr
pay money to call Portal (in California) long distance when he has local
Internet access? For that matter, what says Furr@cup.portal.com is using
his real name??

> sb3t+@andrew.cmu.edu "Shirl G. Grant" 
> sggrant+@pitt.edu Shirley G Grant 

This one is a possible.
 
> sybase!leighann@Sun.COM Leigh Ann Hussey 
> sybase!leighann@Sun.COM Leigh Ann Hussey Oster 

This one's pretty likely.

Still, aren't you reading malicious intent where there may well be none? In
particular, these folks, far from intending to stuff the ballot box, may well
have simply forgotten that they had voted, and voted again. I've done exactly
that, with no intent to have my voice counted more than once.

>I didn't count the guest@junkyard.asd.sgi.com Guest Account, since
>some people do read from Guest Accounts.

Mighty civilized of you.

>And before I forget, welcome to USENET, rec.motorcycles.harley!

This sure rings hollow in light of your previous accusations.

Welcome back to Usenet, Harleyites!
-- 
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.
  "Anything that an F-4 can outturn is not maneuverable." -- Mary Shafer
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.motorcycles,rec.motorcycles.racing,rec.motorcycles.dirt,alt.motorcycles.harley
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: Impropriety in soc.culture.tamil vote
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 13:32:49 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia):
>I also got that you like the role of a self-appointed judge.

Pot.  Kettle.  Black.
-- 
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