HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Mike King
Subject: Re: Why only ONE british olympic team
Organization: Northern Telecom Ltd.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 13:26:08 GMT

In article <92209.133750RBYAML@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com> Aengus Lawlor
<RBYAML@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com> writes:
>In article <92209.085455BERNARD@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>,
>BERNARD@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Bernard BELL) says:
>>
>>In rugby, Scotland, England and Wales compete as separate teams in the
>>Home Championship, but N.Ireland and Eire compete together as a unified
>>Ireland team.  Occassionaly they all get together to tour as the British
>>Lions. I assume that the Lions include representatives from Eire. Someone
>>correct me if I'm wrong.
>Well, in Ireland it's usually called the British and Irish Lions.
>
>And most Irish people prefer that you don't use the Eire when speaking
>in English. The name of the state in English is Ireland. If you want to
>unambigouosly specify that you're not including Northern Ireland, the
>Republic of Ireland is your best bet.
>
>The Irish team in the Olympics are entered in the name of Ireland, and
>atheletes from the whole island are eligible to compete for Ireland in the
>Olympics, but only those from Northern Ireland are entitled to compete for
>Great Britain. As far as I can recall, two of the men who won Olympic Gold
>Medals in Hockey for GB last time round, played for Ireland in the Hockey
>World Cup 2 years ago. (They were both from Northern Ireland).
>
>>
>>GB or UK does not compete as a team in the Commonwealth Games. Instead, the
>>constituent parts compete as separate teams (England, Scotland, etc.).
>>
>>Those of you who watched the opening ceremony of the Olympics would have
>>seen that the British team came in as under the name Great Britain, or
>>more accurately, under Grande Bretagne, since the language of nomenclature
>>for the parade was French. Does anyone know why the British compete as
>>Grande Bretagne and not as Royaume Uni?
>
Also, what is puzzling to me, is the "Great Britain" team marches in behind the
flag of the United Kindom. Why?       Mike King
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Truth with a capital T
Date: 28 Jul 92 17:23:05 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: RBYAML@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com (Aengus Lawlor)

>In article <1992Jul23.141015.21412@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>, mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew
>Huntbach) says:
>>
>>"1066 and All That" ends with a sad little note that since World War I,
>>America had become Top Nation and History had come to a.
>
>Come to a period? That's how this thread got started again!
>Lurkers who don't speak the same language as the rest of us.

Period? British usage calls '.' a "full stop".

Matthew Huntbach
From: glh@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (, Gene A. Heyler)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Derogatory fanny pack
Date: 27 Jul 1992 09:29:46 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


    Some friends of mine recently visited the UK and were told the phrase 
"fanny pack", used to describe the strap-on around-the-waist carry pouch,
was a derogatory racial term, so should use the term "bum bag" instead. 
They were not given an explanation, so perhaps someone could enlighten us 
as to whom this is offensive and why.

BTW, the word "bum" of course means hobo or tramp or lazy person in America
so one could wildly extrapolate that "bum bag" is offensive to them.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Gene A. Heyler                      Phone: 410-792-5000 x8664
Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab   FAX  : 410-792-6670
Bldg 24-E131                        Internet : GLH@APLCOMM.JHUAPL.EDU
Laurel, MD  20723
From: fofp@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Holmes)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,uk.misc
Subject: Re: Americanising of the UK
Date: 29 Jul 92 10:18:16 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University



>=>Neil Postlethwaite (neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk) writes:
>=>
>=>> Does anyone think that the all pervading Amercanisation
>=>> of the world had really gotten out of hand.

It hasn't happened here dude :-)

FoFP
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 05:20:34 EDT
From: jeremy <ELE@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Americanising of the UK

In article <4884@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU>, streater@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU
(Tim Streater) says:
>
>In article <92210.035504ELE@psuvm.psu.edu> ELE@psuvm.psu.edu (jeremy) writes:
>>False.  "Gotten" is a perfectly ordinary English (ie, from England) word.
>>We here in Blighty *used* to use it, it went to the US and stayed, meanwhile
>>it died out over here (although is survived in words like "forgotten").

[tin's quote supporting my argument deleted]

>So, Nephew, strictly you are correct but I think the original poster was
>complaining about today's usage, under which "gotten" would be called an
>Americanism. Many such words/expressions indeed come from older English
>(e.g., I guess, fall).

Two posters replying; two posters agreeing with me.  Not bad.
However, another interesting aspect of this are so-called "boomerang"
words; that is, ones which died out over here (UK) but are now winging
their way back.  Perhaps these are a better source of evidence on the
matter of the US cultural hegemony (tm).  Someone will no doubt waste
hundreds, if not thousands of dollars, posting examples.

--
jeremy..
Any replies to: cramptonj@csovax.portsmouth.ac.uk
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:10627 rec.games.empire:2315 alt.war:1543
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.games.empire,alt.war
Subject: Re: BBN II -- Murk-o-Vision World Update (Mau Mau)
Date: 24 Jul 92 10:15:05 GMT
Followup-To: alt.war
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <1992Jul24.050033.18743@dscomsf.desy.de>, by hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker):
> The US murdered more Vietnamese in the war than Ho Chi Minhs govt did after.

Of course.  After the war, the North Vietnamese controlled everything, so 
why murder anybody?  The question is, how many did *they* murder *during* 
the war?  Granted that the US Army often had a cavalier attitude towards
"collateral damage", but I don't think they deliberately targeted
civilians that were not involved in combat, infiltration, or that kind
of stuff.

The Vietcong, on the other hand, always deliberately used force
against civilians, both for terror and for strategic purposes.  I
remember reading once that the first activity of the Vietcong in South
Vietnam was a campaign to kill all the school teachers in the Mekong
delta, since after removing the "intellectuals", controlling the
villages would be easier.  Lovely folks, these Vietcong.
-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.war
From: nigel@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov
Subject: Re: BBN II -- Murk-o-Vision World Update (Mau Mau)
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md, USA
	<NIGEL.92Jul27135823@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov>
	<1992Jul27.161310@IASTATE.EDU>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 15:33:40 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.161310@IASTATE.EDU> wehumble@IASTATE.EDU (Ed Humble) writes:

[lots deleted]

>I beg to differ.  Five or six British ships sunk, and six to eight more hit
>with bombs that didn't explode (better ordinance would DEFINITELY cost the RN
>several more ships) adds up to a damn good performance for the Argentine flyers
>considering they were at the long end of their attack range.  Considering the
>size of the RN, those are pretty significant losses.  Granted the Argentine Army
>and Navy didn't perform up to snuff, but 'trounced' is too one-sided a word,
>IMHO.  

Ummm...trounced considering the British were themselves at the extreme
range of a vulnerable logistics train and the fact that for some odd
ball reason the Argentine air force withdrew the top line fighters to
protect bases the Brits could only hit by jumping through hoops with
obsolecent bombers.  Overall the bravery and determination (not to
mention skill) of the flyers weren't enough to shift the outcome of
the conflict when the land forces surrender to units half their size...
while enjoying defensive advantage.

I would have helped if the Argentine Navy at least taught the air
force flyers the trick of skipping bombs so they arm correctly on low
level attacks (or alternatively the Argentine Gov't had secured the
correct fuses or perhaps even better more Exocets...that would have
ruined the RN...then again we could alway speculate on how much better
the RN would have done with adequate AEW coverage). 

Granted that hindsight is 20/20 but the RN was in the horrible
situation of being outgunned while everyone else expected them to
simply walk over the Argentines.  After all G.B. is a world power
while Argentina is merely a regional power.  In truth they were damned
lucky to get off with as few losses as they did and win the
'war'...one that shouldn't have been fought in the first place...

>Where did this thread start, and what does the title have to do with it? 

I think somebody incorrectly included s.c.b in some alt.war thread
(presumably about SBS and SAS which is vaguely relevant to s.c.b but
not really).  Someone there jumped all over US military incompetence
(and the poor quality of US NCOs...having know a few I had to come to
thier defense ;-) and the thread has been burning quite nicely ever
since. As for the title I haven't a clue.

>> --
>> Nigel Tzeng

>Ed Humble                |   Iowa State University   -  Moo!          
--
Nigel Tzeng
.sig under construction
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.games.empire,alt.war
From: buckley@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (BUCKLEY  CHARLES RAY)
Subject: Re: BBN II -- Murk-o-Vision World Update (Mau Mau)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 05:14:17 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.203836.5003@dscomsf.desy.de> hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:
>In article <92Jul21.103933edt.104@orasis.vis.toronto.edu>,
>liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu) writes:
>|>In article <14gneeINNneq@agate.berkeley.edu>
>|>tedrick@whistle.Berkeley.EDU (Tom Tedrick) writes:
>|>>->The King, satisfied, goes back to listening to Zevon sing about
>|>the
>|>>
>|>The British Empire was nothing but a hollow shell after WWI, although
>|>the Brits think they still had an Empire.  After WWII, both Brits and
>|>the French are finished as Empires.  The Brits knew it, but don't

{lots of stuff deleted}
>
>Well not too long before they became unecconomic to keep. Just think
>what a drain India would be on the exchequer if we still had it. We
>would have to be paying out money for roads and schools and hospitals,
>as well as a major army to subdue the restless elements. Hell we would
>probably have to repay all the money stolen under the Empire!
>
>
>The US could never learn the British Guerilla tactics because they just
>don't have the mindset. They prefer egotistical little one man Rambo
>style warriors.

Not quite true. The generals fighting almost always prefered large division
or battalion movements. Thesenetted little or no gain. An example of this is
Operation Cedar Falls which involved an entire corp yet only netted 750 killed
and 280 prisoners. The most effective troops were the ones who had 'gone native'but these were a distinct minority of the American forces.

 They have an army built arround the latest techno
>wizardry rather than the British system of bloody good Sargeants.
>Ultimately the US lost Vietnam because they didn't know why they were
>fighting, they didn't beleive in their aims or methods, they
>underestimated their opponents and failed to understand the territory.
>They got their asses kicked and a damn good thing to. Until they build a
>second monument to the people they killed and appologise to the
>Vietnamese people, the US will never regain its old position in the
>world. Vietnam was the start of the collapse of the US empire, perhaps
>they will be smart enough to realise this sooner than the British were.

The US may never regain what it was at the end of WWII unless it once again enjoys the distinction of being the only industrial power left in the world.
Apologizing to Viet Nam won't regain the US that position.

>
>
>Phill Hallam-Baker

Charles Buckley
From: proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: BBC TV world service
Date: 27 Jul 92 18:44:30 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <1992Jul26.134740.7823@vax.oxford.ac.uk> wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <1992Jul24.133900.17412@pixel.kodak.com>, dj@ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
>> In article <1992Jul23.222522.1446@Arco.COM> lowry@arco.com (Phil Lowry) writes:
>>>Is it possible to pick up the BBC World Service TV Broadcast in the US?
>>>
>>>If so does anyone know what satelitte and bands it is on?
>>>                                                                             
>> I'm not aware of it being on any satellites.  I can get it at various
>> points around the short-wave area of the spectrum.  I found the
>...
>> Anyway, get a reasonable SW radio, such as Radio Shack's $100 model,
>Bzzzt!! 
 ^^^^^
 This idiotic "visual sound effect", which seems to be used to denote that
 fact that a dissenting reply follows, must be derived from some Amurican
 `IQ-68' game show, and as such has no place on soc.culture.british.

 Please use: "Excuse me good sir, but I beg to suggest that you may be
 mistaken in your aforementioned claim, and would ask you to consider
 the following".

 Sorry for this outburst, but I just hate this "bzzt" thing. It is almost
 as bad as all the cretins yelling "<simple declarative statement> ... Not!"
 at each other.

 And as for `rap music' .... well, I have probably said enough for now.

   Paul

 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.new-zealand
From: matthew@ntl02.decnet.nokia.fi (Matthew Faupel)
Subject: Re: New banknotes
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications, Cambridge, UK
	<1992Jul20.030701.16432@rata.vuw.ac.nz> <5377@mccuts.uts.mcc.ac.uk>
	<1992Jul22.100552.24187@osf.org> <1992Jul27.060213.12128@trl.oz.au>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 16:49:23 GMT

LL: Liron Lightwood in article <1992Jul27.060213.12128@trl.oz.au>
DG: David George in article <1992Jul22.100552.24187@osf.org>

DG: What does the Bank of England/Scotland etc. gain out of issuing
DG: banknotes ?  It seems like a con to me, I persuade a group of people to
DG: use a worthless chitty with no real assets backing it, which represents
DG: goods and services provided by them

LL: Aren't banknotes backed by reserves of gold held by the British Government,
LL: i.e. they have at least enough gold to equal the total of all banknotes?

Not since they abandoned the Gold Standard sometime back in the 1920's.
There's nowhere near enough gold to back all the notes and coins issued
these days.


Matthew
--
---* Amnesiac the Wizard *------------------* matthew@uk.tele.nokia.fi *---
 Opinions expressed here are not those of my company.    | NB. ntl02 is EN
 They're not even my own; I plagiarised the lot of them! | TEE EL ZERO TWO
---* matthew@ntl02.decnet.nokia.fi *------------------* Matthew Faupel *---
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:10888 rec.arts.books:13359
From: ag129@cl.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Biggles Books
Date: 29 Jul 92 15:02:00 GMT
Reply-To: ag129@cl.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Organization: U of Cambridge Comp Lab, UK

In article <4159@inca.comlab.ox.ac.uk> Geraint.Jones@comlab.oxford.ac.uk (Geraint Jones) writes:
>No, no; it's ``no kicking the cat, /new/ romantic involvements''.  There   
>was only one romantic involvement in the whole canon, Ginger.  I do   /

Er, what about Marie?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: matthew@ntl02.decnet.nokia.fi (Matthew Faupel)
Subject: Re: WANTED: how much does a bicycle cost in Cambridge, England?
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications, Cambridge, UK
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:51:31 GMT

In article <21780598@otter.hpl.hp.com> tgg@otter.hpl.hp.com (Tom Gardner) writes:

TG: |   I currently have a Ross Grand Tour II (10 speed), and will either
TG: |look at similar bikes or mountain bikes. [ for use in Cambridge ]

TG: Of course you need gears in Cambridge:
TG: 	- for Castle Hill
TG: 	- for Mill Rd railway bridge (but many people get off and push their
TG: 	  bike over)
TG: 	- when you are fighting the winds from the Urals

And don't forget the the Gog Magogs...

As to answering the original question (which seems to have been somewhat
forgotten), I'm not exactly sure how good your bike is (I'm not a bike freak
and the name means nothing to me), but for comparison you can get a new
3-speed town bike for about 90 quid, a bottom of the range mountain bike for
about 120 to 130 and (so I'm told by someone who knows more about this than
myself) you don't need to pay more than 450 to get something of professional
quality.


Matthew
--
---* Amnesiac the Wizard *------------------* matthew@uk.tele.nokia.fi *---
 Opinions expressed here are not those of my company.    | NB. ntl02 is EN
 They're not even my own; I plagiarised the lot of them! | TEE EL ZERO TWO
---* matthew@ntl02.decnet.nokia.fi *------------------* Matthew Faupel *---
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sp@mirabeau.osf.fr (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: Why only ONE british olympic team
Reply-To: sp@mirabeau.osf.fr (Simon Patience)
Organization: OSF Research Institute
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 06:56:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.164615.5711@tcom.stc.co.uk>, bruce@tcom.stc.co.uk
(Bruce Munro) writes:
> In article <1992Jul28.124514.14930@cs.hw.ac.uk> nick@cs.hw.ac.uk (Nick
Taylor) writes:
> >
> >Anybody got any more? We must be called the UK in something!
> 
> We used to be called the UK ( or Royaume Uni) in Jeux Sans Frontieres!

Not any more, I caught a glimpse of the latest series on the TV the
other day (it is just as awful and in French it is even less funny as
you don't have Stewart Wossisname having apoplexy all the time) and we
are now called GB by abbreviation. Strangely the commentators keep
refering to Pays de Galles. Is it really only Wales participating?

Simon.

  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
From: ucacijw@ucl.ac.uk (Mr Ian John Wakeman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: VAX Account
Date: 30 Jul 92 14:32:53 GMT
Organization: Bloomsbury Computing Consortium, London

In article <1992Jul30.072414.10051@ibmpcug.co.uk> dylan@ibmpcug.co.uk (Matthew Farwell) writes:
>In article <153b6rINNjnq@grapevine.EBay.Sun.COM> martin.baines@uk.sun.com writes:
>>Phill - you got it wrong:
>>
>>He actually wanted an account to use a VAX - you know one of
>>those vacuum cleaners with water in it.
>
>As they say - Nothing sucks like a VAX.
>

But my mate Dave was telling me about this Antonia de Sancha woman, and
then old Andrew Neil used to know this Pamella de Bordes (who she?)...

cheers
ian

ps I'm waiting for the first dominatrix sex scandal to leak out from the
cabinet - where else would they turn after so many years?  Can you imagine
Dougie Hurd, or (perish the thought) on all fours asking for another
--
Ian Wakeman                                       +44 71 387 7050 ext 3706
Internet: I.Wakeman@cs.ucl.ac.uk  UUCP: ...!{uunet,uknet}!ucl-cs!I.Wakeman
Computer Science, University College London, Gower Street, LONDON WC1E 6BT
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: dylan@ibmpcug.co.uk (Matthew Farwell)
Subject: Re: Metric System (was: New banknotes)
Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK.
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 13:48:33 GMT

In article <BrvyJ6.1sD@brunel.ac.uk> Christopher.Carne@brunel.ac.uk (Christopher J Carne) writes:
>PS If it takes a man and a half a day and a half to dig a hole and a half,
>how long does it take five men to dig five holes?

You can't have half a man, or half a hole for that matter.

Dylan (pedants of the world unite)
-- 
It is no coincidence that in no known language does the phrase 'As
pretty as an Airport' appear -- Douglas Adams
From: daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: New banknotes
Date: 28 Jul 92 12:22:40 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAXcluster

> DG: What does the Bank of England/Scotland etc. gain out of issuing
> DG: banknotes ?  It seems like a con to me, I persuade a group of people to
> DG: use a worthless chitty with no real assets backing it, which represents
> DG: goods and services provided by them
> 

People accept banknotes as having value because they know that everybody else
does....

Dave
-- 

David Hastings                      | "Imposition of order=escalation of chaos"
VAX Systems Programmer              |                     
Oxford University Computing Services| "Just when you think you've won the 
daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk              |        rat race, along come faster rats"
               
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: pere@chopin.udel.edu (Persephone Brooks)
Subject: music stores in London
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 19:04:57 GMT


	I'm going to be taking a vacation to London in a few weeks, and
I'm very interested in buying some CDs while I'm there that I can't find
in the US.  Can anyone give me suggestions for good music stores in
London?  I'm specifically interested in alternative, industrial, and
U2 that can't be found here.  Thanks for your help!
	I'll also need addresses, if possible, since I don't know my way
around yet.
___________
Pere Brooks
University of Delaware
pere@brahms.udel.edu 
___________
From: smckinty@sunicnc.France.Sun.COM (Steve McKinty - Sun ICNC)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Metric System (was: New banknotes)
Date: 22 Jul 1992 12:45:14 GMT
Organization: SunConnect
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: hardy.france.sun.com

In article <JHEIKKIL.92Jul22134535@utrio.helsinki.fi>, jheikkil@ling.helsinki.fi (Juha Heikkila) writes:
	> In article <14ggopINNib4@grapevine.EBay.Sun.COM> smckinty@sunicnc.France.Sun.COM (Steve McKinty - Sun ICNC) writes:
	> 
	>    Then there are the half-metric things, like car tyres. I don't know about
	> 
	> Talking about cars, have the British car manufacturers always
	> expressed the capacity of engines in cubic centimetres or litres
	> (like 2000cc or 2.0 litres)? Or was it earlier based on some
	> equivalent measure in cubic inches (or some such), which was then
	> rounded for the benefit of metric customers?
	> 
I've never seen anything but metric (but my memories of cars don't go back
too far past the 70's). In practice they're never quite the labelled value,
a 2000cc engine will be about 1990-1998cc. This is because the various tax
bands are at the '00' values, and if a manufacturer made an engine to be
exactly 2000cc, production tolerances could push it to 2001 & it would
inadventently end up in a higher tax band, with all sorts of legal
complications.

To avoid that they aim for, say, 1998cc then even with +/- a bit it
keeps them on the right side of the tax law.

Steve
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british