HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)
Subject: Re: Halloween in England
Originator: nickh@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<1992Sep24.015045.22917@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
	<1992Sep24.085041.29530@rdg.dec.com>
	<1992Sep25.080333.28456@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>
	<1992Sep25.165403.22099@rdg.dec.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 18:47:39 GMT

In article <1992Sep25.165403.22099@rdg.dec.com> cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn) writes:

   The Celts were celebrating their festivals long before there were 
   Catholics. I certainly don't perceive Hallowe'en as being a Catholic
   festival - I have always considered it as Pagan, which was the Celtic
   religion before Christianity. [etc]

"Pagan" is not and never has been a religion. It is merely a word for
a non-Christian. From "paganus", i.e. civilian. (as opposed to
Christians, who are soldiers for Christ, and evil spirits, who are the
agents of the devil).

I should be able to tell you which early church writer this comes
from, but I'm working from memory: that set of references is back in
Cambridge.

Nick Haines nickh@cmu.edu
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Currency Problems
Date: 5 Oct 92 10:08:27 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

In article <ql6g9ao@zola.esd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.174410.18039@bristol.ac.uk>, smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee) writes:
>|> 
>|> If, on the other hand, the company is intrinsically a monopoly, and is
>|> providing necessities of life, then, for reasons I've laid out
>|> elsewhere, yes, I think 'society' (by which I mean, in this case,
>|> 'government' as its agent) should be the provider.  
>
>I've seen no compelling arguments for this.   I was brought up
>to think of certain services as being "natural" monopolies and
>so candidates for nationalization.
>
>But travel is so broadening.   In the past twenty years I've 
>travelled on privately owned trains, drunk privately provided
>water, used privately generated electricity, had private garbage
>haulage, used privately run telephone systems, and you know what: 
>in no case could I tell the difference in a systematic way.  Some
>were better than the government service, and some worse.    There
>simply is not enough evidence around to persuade me that Government
>is either a better director of investment, a better producer of the
>service, or even a better self-regulator, than any private company
>in these areas.

Interesting, again I find that I start from the same set of assumptions
and a similar set of experiences, and end up at the opposite pole to you.
(And, even worse, I'm pretty sure that we're of much the same ages.)

All I can do is repeat what I've said.  I can see reasons, in
principle, why government services in specific sorts of areas COULD be
more efficient, and that my feeling is that, in those areas, government
ought to be doing the things.  If they are not maximally efficient, the
answer is to figure out WHY, not to go passing these things off to
someone who, by virtue of needing a profit on top of the minimal costs,
does not even have the potential for ever hitting the minimum.

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones)
Subject: Re: bad teeth
Organization: :noitazinagrO
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 13:22:38 GMT

wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk wrote:
: In article <1992Sep24.192403.25188@cas.org>, jac54@cas.org writes:
: > 	A point nobody has mentioned so far is that a basic level of
: > 	dental care is available to everyone in Britain.  
: 
: I'm afraid that verb ought to be "was". As a protest against government changes
: in their contracts, almost all dentists in this country will no longer accept
: new adult patients for treatment under the NHS. So if you're not registered,
: it's private dental care or nothing. For someone for whom having a tooth
: capped would be a month's income, that's a pretty hard choice.
: 
: >       In the U.S.,
: > 	unless you take out specific dental insurance, which isn't
: > 	necessarily available if you work for a small organization or
: > 	are self-employed, or pay for everything yourself, or you go
: > 	without.  As a result, you get extremes, twenty-one year olds
: > 	with no front teeth, or 70-year-olds with a new set of caps.
: > 
: > 	Alec.
: 
: Expect the same here in a few years' time.
: -- 
I'm afraid dental "insurance" (perhaps "coverage" is the better word) is
widely misunderstood.  Insurance is there for expensive things that
don't happen very often, but people expect to get free treatment for
their teeth on a regular basis.  Most dental plans are provided by
employers as a perk and cover routine hygeine and minor fixups almost
100%, but give you only 50% of the cost of major work, if they give
anything at all.  This is exactly the opposite of what real "insurance"
should do.  What it is, actually, is employer-paid dental treatment with
a cap on (pun intended).

I've been offered private dental insurance before - it was about 30
dollars a year.  A typical hygeine visit runs about 45 dollars, fillings
about 35.  Most people of any means should be able to pay this out of
pocket, or at least thru a credit card.  On the other hand, when I had
some gold caps replaced, it cost me over $500 even with the insurance 
that my wife's employer provides.

Now obviously free hygeine visits are a good idea, but calling the
current stuff "insurance" is just plain stupid.
--
||)) There is no truth to the rumor that:)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))|
||)) Lotus are suing Apple for copying the look and feel of their lawsuits )|
||))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))|
||Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com) | Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY   |
From: mickw@autodesk.com (Mick Washbrook)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Pardon my ignorance and such
Date: 1 Oct 92 18:25:16 GMT

In article <6250083@hpopd.pwd.hp.com>, ian@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Ian Watson) writes:
> 
>         As for geography, how many Americans cancelled flights to Europe
>         during the Gulf Duck-shoot, because it was too close to Gulf ?  We
>         could probably exchange examples till the cows come home, and thereby
>         prove that neither of us has anything to be proud of in the levels of
>         knowledge displayed by our compatriots.

I'm reminded of the time when Charlton Heston was arguing with some 
British journalist about the Gulf War. The journalist asked Heston
where Kuwait was and which countries shared borders with it. It was
exquisite to watch Heston try and avoid the question--he clearly
didn't have a clue where the country was. The journalist told him
that if you're going to bomb a country, you might at least have
the decency to know where it was.

--
From: jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Date: 30 Sep 92 12:26:15 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

=>In article <1992Sep29.070708.11757@rdg.dec.com> cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn) writes:
=>
=>>Somehow I doubt it. I saw this year's exam papers in Scotland, and there
=>>was Shakespeare, but no Robert Burns, probably the world's best known poet.

Best known, possibly. Most over-rated, certainly.



-- 
=======Jeremy Henderson========jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk===============
From: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Words: American vs English (UK type)
Date: 2 Oct 92 07:09:48 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Co. Ltd., Reading, England


In article <venable.164@faculty.coe.wvu.wvnet.edu>, venable@faculty.coe.wvu.wvnet.edu (Wallace Venable) writes...
>In article <26432@castle.ed.ac.uk> cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:
> 
>>>Truck vs. Lory
> 
The spelling is "lorry"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Craig Cockburn, Digital Equipment Co. Ltd, Reading, England.     Suas
  Internet: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com                           leis
  UUCP:..!decwrl!edieng.enet.dec.com!cockburn                      a'
                                                                   Gha\idhlig!
  Views here are my own, and are not necessarily those of Digital
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: achin@math.tamu.edu (Andrew Chin)
Subject: Re: Runyards problem (Was: Help seeking flat i
Reply-To: achin@math.tamu.edu
Organization: Dept of Mathematics, Texas A&M University
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 23:17:34 GMT

So I gather that Runyards is pretty bad news.  Should I avoid agencies
altogether, or just Runyards?
---
Andrew Chin    Dept. of Math.    Texas A&M U.    College Station, TX 77843
achin@math.tamu.edu   Probably not TAMU's exact opinions.   (409) 845-0261
                * Fighting racism is not a special interest *
From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Words: American vs English (UK type)
Date: 30 Sep 92 23:51:22 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <BvEwtB.D5F@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> cscdc@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Dan Carpenter) writes:

> I would like to have a list, If anyone has one, where in a America we
>call something by one name and in England it is called by another.

>Truck vs. Lory

>Can anyone help me? 

Ok. In English a Lory is a large Australasian parrot with a brushlike
tongue. What is it called in America? I thought in America a truck was
a large goods vehicle?
-- 
Chris Malcolm    cam@uk.ac.ed.aifh          +44 (0)31 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence,    Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK                DoD #205
From: andyw@aspen32.cray.com (Andy Warner)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Return to UK - Queries.
Date: 6 Oct 92 16:19:55 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Originator: andyw@aspen32


In article <1992Oct6.080440.23330@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>, mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
> From: agc@bmdhh298.bnr.ca (Alan Carter)
> >[Ipswich tourist board pamphlet deleted...]
> >This is a purely personal impression over 12 months old, but my advice
> >would be to avoid Ipswich if you want more than a hypothetical
> >aquaintance with employment.
> 
> I don't see any reason to particularly advise avoiding Ipswich.
> Your description of the place could apply to almost anywhere in
> Britain after 13 years of "economic miracle" Tory government.
> It would be marginally more useful to point out a town that
> hasn't had large-scale redundancies, and whose shopping centre
> is full and bustling. Offhand, I can't think of any.

Now, now - we all know this will spark off "The Right Honorable Member
for California". Although only being able to say "it could be worse"
after 13 years in office is starting to ring a little hollow..
-- 
andyw.	N0REN/G1XRL

andyw@aspen.cray.com	Andy Warner, Cray Research, Inc.	(612) 683-5835
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13506 rec.arts.books:17502
From: thorntn@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Duncan Peter G. Thornton)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Keywords: Ya canna say that on the telly!
Date: 2 Oct 92 19:30:46 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

In <lcm76pINNjgj@news.bbn.com> ncramer@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer) writes:

>Chuck Smythe writes...
>>	A very effective way of selling Shakespeare (or other Lit) to
>>	the pubescent mind is to point out the racy bits. 

>Oh, come on.  Do you really think the average 14-yr old --who has spent
>most of his/her sentient life watching Madonna videos and living in a house
>with unrestricted pay-TV/cable-access-- is gonna even bat an eye as Hamlet
>speaks to Ophelia of "country matters", or Kate is told of having "my
>tongue in your tail"?

>Get a life.  (Or at least meet some real high-school kids.   ;)

Bat an eye, no. Enjoy it, yes. Just because people see full- frontal
nudity on cable doesn't mean they don't enjoy looking around at the
beach.

- Duncan
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.celtic
From: livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Organization: sgi
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 20:05:17 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.161729.7964@st-andrews.ac.uk>, rm4@st-andrews.ac.uk (Rosa Michaelson) writes:
|> I pities your ignorance and dispises your ignorance.
|> Have either of you read any Burns other than 'red, red rose'?
|> A Cotter's Saturday Night? 
|> Tam O'Shanter? 
|> surely not...

Don't let these philistines get you down.   I'm sure
Burns' poetry is actually much better than it reads.

jon.
From: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:26:46 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Co. Ltd., Reading, England


In article <1992Sep29.123926.12123@sei.cmu.edu>, firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) writes...
>In article <1992Sep29.070708.11757@rdg.dec.com> cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn) writes:
> 
>>Somehow I doubt it. I saw this year's exam papers in Scotland, and there
>>was Shakespeare, but no Robert Burns, probably the world's best known poet.
> 

Auld Lang Syne is probably the world's best known piece of poetry.
Don't you remember who is accredited for writing it when you sing it?

(Burns didn't write it all, only a few verses, but his name generally
 goes with the song)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Craig Cockburn, Digital Equipment Co. Ltd, Reading, England.     Suas
  Internet: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com                           leis
  UUCP:..!decwrl!edieng.enet.dec.com!cockburn                      a'
                                                                   Gha\idhlig!
  Views here are my own, and are not necessarily those of Digital
From: pleach@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Paul Leach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Guy Fawkes night
Date: 28 Sep 92 13:56:34 GMT
Organization: The Franklin Institute Science Museum

When I was a kid...in the days of yore....a penny for the guy added up to 
some decent money (I used to start as soon as school started.) What is the 
cry nowadays as I understand a penny won't take you too far.
                                 Paul




 


--
*  THE FRANKLIN INSTITUTE SCIENCE MUSEUM, FUTURES CENTER AND FELS PLANETARIUM*
*    The Franklin Institute  *  This post is made possible by a generous     *
*    20th St. & The Parkway  *  grant from: The National Opinions Foudation  *
*    Philadelphia, PA.19103  *  Phone : 215-448-1337  Fax : 215-448-1235     *
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13520 soc.culture.celtic:6455
From: ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Getting some intelligent discussion going.
Date: 3 Oct 92 17:30:39 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <26602@dog.ee.lbl.gov> mike@fionn.lbl.gov (Michael Helm) writes:
>Alasdair Grant selectivizes the evidence:
>>of genetics. On the one hand we have people telling us that Ireland is
>>a Celtic country, on the other they say that Celtic people have certain
>>kinds of skin/hair colour. Then you combine the two things.
>
>But wait!  On the, uh, 3rd hand, we have had people tell us the
>Irish are not Celtic at all (a la Bob Quinn), & others dispute
>the hair/skin color stories.  Why did you discount or ignore them?

I am not taking the views (the ones I originally mentioned) as facts,
I am taking the _expression_ of them as indicative of a certain view of
the Celtic countries which marginalises and trivialises debate on them.
It is also clear that American posters to this group tend far more to
this Celtic twilight, Celtic fringe idea, and have no interest in, or
knowledge of, modern Scotland.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: mossop@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Antony Mossop)
Subject: Re: Words: American vs English (UK type)
Organization: Stanford Univ. Earth Sciences
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 22:37:34 GMT

In article <1asp8uINNoct@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> ah335@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard Banks) writes:
>
>I notice many British people use the word `sod' when refering to someone.
>It's seems to be used negatively.  What is a sod?  What does it mean?
>When would you refer to someone as a sod?  And finally, what is a 
>`cheeky sod'?
>
>Thanks.


I believe that it's short for sodomite, when used as an insult. Most
people in the UK regard it as a mild insult (much like bugger). The
mildness has little to do with the meaning of the word and if you
were to call someone the same thing using different words you run
the risk of causing a great deal of offence, or not, depending on what
you say and who you say it to. 'Cheeky sod' would have been a term of
endearment from my less genteel grandmother!

Tony Mossop, geophysics, Stanford
From: eastwood@inline (David Eastwood)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: ALWAYS REMEMBER (was: Re: Guy Fawkes night)
Date: 2 Oct 92 20:17:40 GMT

In article <NIKOLAY.92Sep28200714@husc10.harvard.edu>  
nikolay@husc10.harvard.edu (Philip Nikolayev) writes:
> 
> There's a poem (song?) about the old saboteur, which begins:
> 'Always remember the 5th of November...' Does anyone remember
> the rest of it, or know any details about it?
> 
> Philip Nikolayev at nikolay@husc.harvard.edu

Here it is from my NeXT's online Oxford Dictionary of Quotations:

ANONYMOUS
ENGLISH
Please to remember the Fifth of November,
Gunpowder Treason and Plot.
We know no reason why gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.
Traditional since 17th cent.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
David Eastwood  ...I feel better than James Brown.....  Sybase, Inc.
eastwood@sybase.com                                     Emeryville, CA.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: streater@unixjr.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Tim Streater)
Subject: Re: Pardon my ignorance and such
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 05:00:36 GMT

In article <TORKEL.92Sep28180332@bast.sics.se> torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen) writes:
>
>react. In the case of "Jap" it has emerged in soc.culture.japan that some
>Japanese at least consider it highly offensive. So do you want to continue

When you figure that "Jap" was the term used during World War 2 it is hardly
surprising that Japanese people would find it offensive.

Tin.

From: duncan@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Duncan Mcintryre@grenoble)
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 09:20:36 GMT
Subject: Re: bad teeth (was: pardon etc.)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara, CA
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british

> Stop whinging all of you. If you want to know about bad teeth then come
> and live in Sunny France (TM) where dental floss is about 5 pounds (~$10)
> a packet when you can find it and the average Frenchie owns one toothbrush
> in their lifetime and can't even spell dentist let alone visit one. And
> lets not start on personal hygiene OK?
> 

Oh please let's, yes, yes ;-)


===============================================================================
Duncan McIntyre                         Email:  Duncan_McIntyre@grenoble.hp.com
Circuit Technology Group                Phone:  (33) 76 62 55 14
Hewlett Packard France                  Fax:    (33) 76 62 59 63

 ".. I am drunk and you madam are ugly, but in the morning I shall be sober."
                                              Winston Churchill
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
From: jac54@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 11:20:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.092635.28303@spider.co.uk> alisonjw@spider.co.uk (Alison J Wyld) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.212802.4550@epas.toronto.edu> sfysh@epas.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Moskal Fysh) writes:
>>>Why is this bonkers?  It sounds like an excellent idea (although it might
>>>be better to require more than one play).
>>
>>It's bonkers because Shakespeare's English is now 375 or so years old.
>>Why should we be expecting 14-year-olds to comprehend it?  It's no
>>wonder so many people dislike reading, and never go to the theatre.
>>Personally, I'd be quite happy to see Shakespeare completely taken out
>>of high school curricula, except for advanced (special) classes and -
>>perhaps - university-qualification level senior classes.
>>
>>Stephanie Fysh
>>Dept. of English
>>Univ. of Toronto
>>(sfysh@epas.utoronto.ca)
>
>Wouldn't it make more sense to make it compulsory that Shakespeare is
>*seen* rather than read.  On paper I find him difficult but on stage I
>think he's wonderful.  Of course requiring classes to go to the
>theatre would cost money...

	Terrific idea, we were frequently herded into busses and
	dragged 50 miles to see the Bristol Rep. doing Shakespeare.
	After a couple of trips the teachers had to try to limit
	numbers.  Shakespeare found the bedrock of human existence
	and limned in wonderful language.  Studying the works of Bill
	is not just a study of literature in a glass case but a perceptive
	and sometimes disturbing exposure of human nature.

	Alec Chambers
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 23:57:52 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.194211.4270@news.Hawaii.Edu> gerard@caliban.soest.hawaii.edu (Gerard Fryer) writes:

>I would love to hear that some enterprising English lit
>teacher in high school presents the Taming of the Shrew by comparing it
>to one of its modern interpretations: that episode of "Moonlighting"
>from a few years ago.

It's been done. 

The nice thing about the "Atomic Shakespeare" episode of "Moonlighting" is
that it caught the essence of "Taming" perfectly.



--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"Liberty resides in the rights of that person
mnemonic@eff.org| whose views you find most odious."
(617) 864-0665  | 
EFF, Cambridge  |                           --John Stuart Mill
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller)
Subject: Re: France, je vous remercie pour l'election d'Anti-Christ
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 19:09:01 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.142610.7534@philmtl.philips.ca> ray@philmtl.philips.ca (Ray Dunn) writes:
>In referenced article, sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) writes:
>>Since we're back on this subject again  - I wish *I* had done this very
>>thing in a few over-priced London restaurants.  Had a couple of rather
>>unpleasant experiences with rude and even argumentative staff. 
>>I retaliated with tiny tips.  Should have left them $$ instead to make
>>the zipperheads work a little more for their money. 
>>
>>Next time I'll carry some small US change with me...
>
>Why would you leave _any_ tip for rude and argumentative staff?

To make the point plain. No tip could mean that it had been forgotten.

>(and was the tip in addition to the service charge on the bill?)

Nah.

I might add that oftentimes the service we encountered in London restaurants
and shops was mediocre at best.  The rest of England wasn't too
bad.  Even people on the street in London seem quite miserable.  No
eye contact and rarely a nod or a smile.  When I told other people (outside
of London) that I found London a drag, they were often surprised (and usually 
told me about other Americans who loved London) but they usually agreed
with me.  I also had a chat or two with Londoners who told me about
their trips to the US and enthused about the service they received there.

Lest you think I am one of these people that expects obsequious service
and "Have a Nice Day" constantly -- hardly!  
I just think I should be treated with a modicum of respect by people
who are trying to get my money.