HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: The end of society as we know it (was Re: Currency Problems)
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:43:14 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

In article <1992Oct1.164550.9166@vax.oxford.ac.uk> wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <1992Oct1.120011.6508@bristol.ac.uk>, smee@bristol.ac.uk 
>(Paul Smee) gave a very clear and coherent account of the way this country-and
>the rest of the world-is going. May I congratulate him on it! However, I
>suspect that the truth will be rather nastier. It does not take too much
>imagination to think of the losers under his scenario: the speculators, the
>stockbrokers, the captains of industry (without money and workers to control,
>they will have no excuse for wanting to have a better lifestyle than everyone
>else). 

Gosh, someone read that?  Thanks.

They will be in a minority.  I would expect that the more enlightened
ones will see what's coming, and go along.  (After all, they will be,
in material terms, no worse off.  Quite the contrary, they'll still
have all of their comforts, and they'll have none of their worries.
And, there are still subtle ways of feeling 'superior' -- e.g. 'I like
Beethoven, while that ignorant lout listens to the Bangles' -- so
they've got no absolute loss.)  The remainder will get swept along.

If nothing else, they will be in a sufficiently small minority that
they won't be able to hold out.  After all, my comment still applies,
there are limits to how long you can suppress the aspirations of the
masses, before something snaps.  We have the ex-USSR, the French
Revolution, and countless other examples of that.  (No, I'm not
advocating 'man the barricades', and 'up against the wall'.  To the
contrary, I see them as a real but highly undesireable possibility, and
I'm trying to figure out how to avoid them.)

The interesting thing is that I think that the movement I hypothesize
will actually be pushed, maybe unwittingly, by these people, since most
of the individual steps which feel necessary to me offer the
opportunity for someone with the necessary capital to make an absolute
killing, by getting in first.  The fact that the ultimate outcome will
make this 'killing' worthless is a long term thing, and these people
don't seem to worry about those.  Someone (or company) WILL take each
individual step, if only out of fear that someone else might do it
first.  

(As I said, British Telecom, to my certain knowledge, is already
looking into this issue in their own specific field, and they are
certainly not the most innovative, nor the most public-spirited,
company in the world.  Life is full of these little ironies, and I'm
coming to love them.)

-- 
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: gerard@caliban.soest.hawaii.edu (Gerard Fryer)
Subject: Re: Abuse A Brit (was Re: Pardon my ignorance and such)
Organization: Scum Of the Earth and Senile Tenured
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 18:36:28 GMT

In article <BvE9zI.DJq@apollo.hp.com>, mcsavaney_d@apollo.hp.com (#David McSavaney) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep29.214033.1223@news.Hawaii.Edu> gerard@caliban.soest.hawaii.edu (Gerard Fryer) writes:

|> >In Malaysia the usual word was "John."  I found that offensive, but I
|> >don't think it was meant to be.
|> 
|> So I guess I should have asked while I lived in Singapore - What does
|> "Roti John" mean? 
|> Remember, it looks like a hamburger sub,excuse 'merkunis(z)m, but
|> with mutton burger and chil(l)i sauce.

The sandwich was definitely a British import to the far East.  I don't
even think that "roti" (bread) has Malay origins (I haven't looked at a
Malay dictionary in two decades, but I believe it is from some Indian
language).  I remember my Malay teacher promising to eat more
sandwiches if I could just figure out more of those damn similes that
pepper the Malay language (you support my culture, I'll support
yours).  [My favorite, and the only one I still use, is saperti katak
dibawah tempurong - like a frog under a coconut shell = xenophobe.]

I assume roti john was some Englishman's attempt to get something
familiar to eat which slowly evolved to accomodate local tastes.
|>                                                              
|> Selamat datang
|> 
Wassalam
-- 
Gerard Fryer  (g.fryer@soest.hawaii.edu)
School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13552 rec.arts.books:17590
From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Date: 5 Oct 92 01:16:54 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Oct2.145932.14086@ttinews.tti.com> jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson) writes:

>Was Shakespeare's "difficult" language immediately accessible to an
>Elizabethan audience? I assume it was, because he was writing plays for
>a living. It would seem that language skills were more advanced in his
>day than they are now? I have been led to believe by period drama that
>17th Century British people took a delight in words, word play, puns and
>so on -- is that true?

Yes. Records of the time bear this out. In the absence of TV etc.
people spent a lot of time telling and listening to stories, and the
common people, although illiterate, could readily understand, and use,
far more complex spoken language than today. The well-known Irish
"gift of the gab" is a survival of some of that verbal tradition to
the current day. Note how many English writers who excel in wordplay
are in fact Irish.

As Bernard Shaw pointed out, the English care so little for their
language that they don't even bother to teach it to their children.
-- 
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
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13546 talk.religion.misc:17631 soc.culture.europe:8778
From: ray@philmtl.philips.ca (Ray Dunn)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.europe
Subject: Re: France, je vous remercie pour l'election d'Anti-Christ
Date: 4 Oct 92 15:48:00 GMT
Organization: On the Brew.

Oh dear, my earlier posting was wrong, we did get the pleasure of a posted
reply.  Sorry if you'd rather I hadn't followed it up, and with a serious
reply too.  I won't again, so if Godfrey replies, he'll get the last word.

In referenced article, godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY) writes:
>I say again, criticism of a group of people, whether justified or not,
>is not necessarily racist.  The Germans are not a race at all, they are
>just a nation, and the people of a nation share national characteristics.

There's nothing wrong with criticizing a specific attribute, or specific
people who have that attribute, assuming it's not part of a gratuitous
insult.  Calling people "objectionable", is of course subjective, and says
as much about the poster as it tells us about his target, especially when a
huge diverse group are tarred with the same brush.

Let's not be pedantic about the meaning of "racism".  Attributing general
negative characteristics to a large group of people and acting accordingly
is not reasonable as far as I'm concerned.

>Not all of them,, of course, there are always exceptions.

Perhaps there's hope for the lad yet!  But no, not just exceptions.  _Most_
people don't have all the characteristics you might perceive from the group
as a whole.  Many of them have none of the characteristics

>If I were to say that "fat people eat too much" you wouldn't accuse me of
>being racist, I presume, and you would allow the statement despite the
>fact that some fat people do not eat too much.

Not racist, but certainly a generalisation that's not true.  Try "_Many_
fat people eat too much."

In any case, a lot depends on the motive.  Nobody's going to complain if
you're being positive.  Gratuitous insults don't usually generate
communication and understanding (*).

>I suspect from your email address that you are Canadian, from the country
>that invented "differently-abled" as a euphemism for disabled,

I can see why you wouldn't understand this.  Euphemisms are usually created
by people who have empathy for others' feelings. (* see what I mean!)

> and where
>full stops (periods) are pronounced "aye".

No, you got this wrong, eh?.  "Aye" is something I say in place of "yes" to
my fellow Scots, eh?.  Canadians don't understand this, eh?

>  I didn't like it there at all,

Another one on your list.

>but I think it must be a great country - after all, a thousand ex-Nazi
>war criminals can't be wrong in choosing it as their home.

If you say so.
-- 
Ray Dunn at home  |  Beaconsfield,  Quebec,  Canada.
(514) 630 3749    |  ray@philmtl.philips.ca  or  ..uunet!sobeco!philmtl!ray
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: david@postman.gr.osf.org (David George)
Subject: Re: VNS: Tue  6-Oct-1992
Organization: OSF RI Grenoble
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 18:08:17 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.141705.7816@bristol.ac.uk>, smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee) writes:
|> >    Exchange Rate for UK pound = $ 1.7065  = Dm 2.3959
|> >	= Yn 204.18 = SFr 2.0888 = FFr 8.1571 = A$ 2.3652
|> 
|> You neglect to mention the 'headline' story that that FTSE drop is the
|> largest drop in a single day since the 1987 'crash', and that that
|> pound = 2.39 Dm is another 5 pfennig drop.  Which leads to some fear
|> (in the Tory party, as well as outside) that interest rates may have to
|> go back up.

Hang on, last time I was in blighty Norm. was saying how the ERM was finished
and he was abandoning the exchange rate doctrine of recent years (which he'd
been forced into anyway) and was leaving the pound to find its own level.  Now
that level seems to be rapidly heading towards 2:1 against the Mark and his
best efforts to encourage destabilisation of the Franc have failed he's
changing his mind again.  Well once more into the breach, eh ?


david.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: riaedwards@halls1.cc.monash.edu.au (AUDREY EDWARDS)
Subject: Re: VNS, Wed 30-Sep-1992
Organization: Halls of Residence, Monash University 
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 03:08:39 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.090800.1254@bristol.ac.uk> smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee) writes:
>From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
>Subject: Re: VNS, Wed 30-Sep-1992
>Date: 1 Oct 92 09:08:00 GMT

>In article <qh3u2oo@zola.esd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep30.161026.29890@rdg.dec.com>, cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn) writes:
>>>
>>> A former TV reseracher has been charged with purgery following 
>>> his participation in a TV documentary in which the Northern 
>>> Ireland security forces were accused of collusion with loyalist 
>>> terrorists.
>>
>>Well, don't leave it like that.   What on earth did he do?

>Standard sort of thing.  Refused to reveal the name(s) of his
>source(s), on grounds that if they became public knowledge said
>source(s) would be killed.  Considering that the allegation was that
>the 'security forces' (in a vague general sense) are assisting
>terrorists, and that it is the 'security forces' (iavgs) who want the
>names, feels at least logically and morally consistent that said
>journalist should refuse to give them, particularly since he gave
>promises of confidentiality as a condition of getting the information.

>-- 
>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


Without trying to flame you, (as I don't know the case, and I'm much too 
nice), from a legal aspect, your explanation sounds incorrect. If what the 
researcher had done had refused to reveal his/her source, then the offence 
would have been one of 'contempt of court', as in the British Steel v 
Granada Television case in 1981. 'Purgery' is actually giving evidence which 
you know to be untrue.

Audrey.
From: sandee@Think.COM (Daan Sandee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: In response to Jon Livesey, also stand on EC, Maastricht and the
Date: 28 Sep 1992 23:43:09 GMT
Organization: TMC
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: telecaster.think.com

In article <qe9gdak@zola.esd.sgi.com>, livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
|> In article <1a77r8INNir6@early-bird.think.com>, sandee@Think.COM (Daan Sandee) writes:
|> |> 
|> |> While Germany (in the Weimar Republic) was still a functioning parliamentary
|> |> democracy, the largest electoral success of the NSDAP was around 35%.
|> 
|> In Europe, it's quite often the case that no single party gets
|> more than fifty percent of the vote.   That's why there is 
|> usually no Constitutional requirement for them to do so.

(etc. etc. etc.)

Jon , I know about European political systems, I've lived there for
forty years. In fact, I may presume I have more first-hand experience
of a parliamentary system with proportional representation (which the
Weimar Republic was) with the ensuing government by coalition that you have
yourself.
I posted that only to refute some of Yadallee's ravings (I am sorry I did
not notice, and delete, the crossposting to talk.religion.misc.). 
Of course, I shouldn't have done it. I should have realized that all of
Yadallee's secret admirers would try to pick holes in it.
By the way, the subject line isn't mine either. I think it's Yadallee's.

Daan Sandee                                           sandee@think.com
Thinking Machines Corporation
Cambridge, Mass 02142                                 (617) 234-5044
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: david@postman.gr.osf.org (David George)
Subject: Re: Currency Problems
Organization: OSF RI Grenoble
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 13:30:53 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.083433.12348@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>, mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:

|> You also seem, like many free marketeers, to be ignoring the
|> time drag factor. If it once again became beneficial or
|> necessary to use British coal, a coal industry could not be
|> rebuilt from scratch.
|> 
|> Matthew Huntbach

'course it could.  You'll'd just have to be prepared to pay the right
price for the coal.... how do you think the industry got started in the
first place ?  Of course you are correct that the start up costs for the
coal industry would be a lot higher with todays' technology.

One problem with British coal is its high sulphur content, it will cost
the electricity industry a lot to burn it, and clean up the pollution.

That said the industry should pay the proper price for transporting coal
from the ports to the power stations.  It's also hard not to believe that
the Tories arn't in a crusade against the mine industry as revenge for '72/3.
(still having lived through 72/3 you can hardly blame them).

David.
From: livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Date: 2 Oct 92 02:55:51 GMT
Organization: sgi

In article <1992Oct1.180530.7767@rz-berlin.mpg.de>, gray@rz-berlin.mpg.de writes:
|>   This thread arrived all in a heap here in sunny Berlin.  Having read it
|> all (pauses to shine fingernails on lapel) at a sitting, and having talked
|> to many adults who learnt English as a second language and met Shakespeare
|> as an example of what to aim for, the following thoughts present themselves.

Let me get this straight.  We're going to take advice about
teaching English from a man who can't even say "I think" in
less than a hundred words?

jon.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13314 rec.arts.books:17304
From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Date: 1 Oct 92 01:13:03 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Sep30.122808.5256@epas.toronto.edu> sfysh@epas.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Moskal Fysh) writes:

>After 4-5 years of Shakespeare in high school I'd have expected my
>19-20 year old first year Honours English students to comprehend it
>too.  Many of them didn't.

It's very rarely that I feel called upon to post something that sounds
very reactionary :-) but the above sounds to me like the total
collapse of primary and secondary English education, plus a peculiarly
liberal admissions policy in University Honours English courses! I'm
not suggesting that Shakespeare should be the crownnig glory of
English classes, simply that being able to understand that kind of
language seems as basic a prerequisite for advanced studies in Eng Lit
as being able to do arithmetic is for going on to study university
level mathematics.

When _I_ was at secondary school it was impossible to pass university
entrance requirements in English unless you could not only
_understand_ Shakespeare's language, but subject it to detailed clause
analysis, parsing, and explain the figures of speech it employed.
Oddly enough, being able to do that helped you to understand it.
Nowadays all that has been completely dropped from the secondary
school curricula. I find it hard to see what has been added.
-- 
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: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: bad teeth
Date: 28 Sep 92 13:39:32 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

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.
-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   Remember what happened to the dinosaurs!
wilcox@maths.oxford.ac.uk  |    I did---and look what happened to me.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: gerard@caliban.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Gerard Fryer)
Subject: Re: Abuse A Brit (was Re: Pardon my ignorance and such)
Organization: University of Hawaii
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 18:23:25 GMT

In article <djc105-021092191016@150.203.18.11>, djc105@rsphy2.anu.edu.au (Damian Jackson) writes:
|> 
|> > You seem to miss the point, it is impossible for a Brit to be insulted by 
|> > someone who is so evidently inferior due to their being foreign,
|> > irregardless of what one is called.
|> > 
|> > Simon.
|> > 
|> > PS :-) For the nationality impaired
|> > 
|> > -- 
|> >   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
|> 
|>  Having read all the above, I find it hard to believe that no other Brits,
|> like myself, took any notice of the guy above. 

[stuff deleted]

Those who use "irregardless" are best ignored.
-- 
Gerard Fryer  (g.fryer@soest.hawaii.edu)
School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13280 rec.arts.books:17254
From: ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:37:42 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <1992Sep30.122808.5256@epas.toronto.edu> sfysh@epas.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Moskal Fysh) writes:
>After 4-5 years of Shakespeare in high school I'd have expected my
>19-20 year old first year Honours English students to comprehend it
>too.  Many of them didn't.

Which might say something about Canada, but it's not like this in Britain.
Eng. Lit students may not _like_ Shakespeare, but that's usually because
they're into Ionesco or Beckett instead, not because the university picked
them for their skill at ice hockey. (We have Land Economy for that :-))

>And Shakespeare isn't God of the English Dept.  Sorry to disappoint.

Well who on earth _is_, then? Robertson Davies?
From: jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Pardon my ignorance and such
Date: 5 Oct 92 10:02:51 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

=>In article <BvI4yC.24n@newcastle.ac.uk> news@newcastle.ac.uk (NEWS system) writes:
=>>In article <1992Oct1.211224.25022@netcom.com>, sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) writes:
=>>From: ntgk@turing.newcastle.ac.uk (Trevor Kirby)
=>>Path: turing!ntgk
=>>
=>>
=>>>
=>>>How the heck can I bomb something if I don't know where it is?  
=>>>Oh I get it, we had the British troops to show us the way.  
=>>>You'd been there before anyway...   ;-)
=>>
=>>{pre-emptive strike on}
=>>
=>>Can we just admit she's lead with her chin, and miss the friendly fire flame
=>>fest out this year please.

But it's such *fun*. Anyone know the Turkish for "friendly fire"?


-- 
===Jeremy Henderson===jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk=          Blad magen
                                            Naett magen
                                Loepp magen
                         Vomen
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
From: livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Organization: sgi
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 04:04:06 GMT

In article <92Oct05.021215.28641@acs.ucalgary.ca>, quigley@acs.ucalgary.ca (Martyn Thomas Quigley) writes:
|> livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
|> >
|> >What are we going to do next?   Excuse the little darlings
|> >from listening to Mozart because it doesn't have a nice
|> >solid disco beat?
|> 
|> No, because it does.  To paraphrase Glenn Gould "A day without
|> Mozart is like a day without memos."

You wouldn't be one of those people who saw Amadeus and concluded
that you had heard His music, would you?

jon.
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: The end of society as we know it (was Re: Currency Problems)
Date: 1 Oct 92 15:45:50 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <1992Oct1.120011.6508@bristol.ac.uk>, smee@bristol.ac.uk 
(Paul Smee) gave a very clear and coherent account of the way this country-and
the rest of the world-is going. May I congratulate him on it! However, I
suspect that the truth will be rather nastier. It does not take too much
imagination to think of the losers under his scenario: the speculators, the
stockbrokers, the captains of industry (without money and workers to control,
they will have no excuse for wanting to have a better lifestyle than everyone
else). 

And since it is these people that have the real power and influence now
it is easy to see that they will try to use that influence to prevent Paul's
levelling out. Indeed it is already happening. Wave and wind power, without
which energy costs wouldn't be zero, are already being pushed back in favour of
dangerous, non-renewable nuclear power. Cheap and efficient rail transport is
already being abandoned in favour of congesting and wasteful road transport. 

No doubt those who have been mesmerised by the arguments of the haves will
accuse me of subscribing to a crazy conspiracy theory, but it is one that I see
a lot of sense in.
-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   Remember what happened to the dinosaurs!
wilcox@maths.oxford.ac.uk  |    I did---and look what happened to me.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british