HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: donald@sq.sq.com (Donald Teed)
Subject: For those who like the German example of highways ...
Summary: rec.autos.driving offers example of problem of high speeds
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 13:45:31 GMT

A little while ago there was a thread about driving going on
in various Canadian newsgroups.  Some people were in favor
of having higher speed limits, and offered the example of
Europe as a fine place to drive safely and quickly.

Here is a posting from rec.autos.driving that might make the
hair stand up on your neck.  Then again, if you are one of those
insensitive high octane/adrenaline types, maybe not.

>Newsgroups: soc.culture.german,rec.autos.driving
>From: mjbarkl@pbhyf.PacBell.COM (Michael Barkley)
>Subject: 220 vehicle pileup in fog on Autobahn 9/26/92?
>Organization: Pacific * Bell
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 22:19:17 GMT
>Followup-To: rec.autos.driving
>Lines: 7
>
>I collect data to use to lobby various governments to improve traffic
>control systems in the fog.  Please send me clippings of the large 
>pileup on the Autobahn over the weekend.  I would be happy to reimburse
>you for your costs.  Thank you.
>
>Mike Barkley, 161 N. Sheridan Ave. #1, Manteca, CA, USA 95336, 209/823-4817
>	   VIVA! - Victims of Impaired Visibility Accidents
>
From: thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: New Constitution text??
Date: 28 Sep 92 15:19:06 GMT
Organization: Matrox Ltd.

golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:

>1) A Canadian Politburo, an entrenched first ministers conference with
>unlimited power to make agreements in any area, which can bind future 
>legislatures and governments, regardless of election outcomes. [...]

This clause does strike me as dangerous.

>2) The new Senate and 40 new MP's...why do we need more politicians
>in Ottawa when we are decentralizing the country future.  Sixty
>something elected Senators are going to cost a hell of a lot more
>than our current unelected bunch, and all the real power was
>given to the Politburo.

Objecting to the cost is reasonable.

>3) Aboriginal self-government...a whole third order of government...
>can you spell A-P-A-R-T-H-E-I-D.

The word apartheid should be used only to refer to regimes analogous
to that of South Africa.  Apartheid was instituted in order to preserve
white privilege and to banish blacks from most of the country. In contrast,
aboriginal self-government, demanded by aboriginal leaders themselves,
is supposed to improve the lives of aboriginals who have already
segregated themselves from white society.

>4) Two new court systems....a tribunal to monitor the social covenant
>and one to maintain and erect new trade barriers between provinces...
>I'm being slightly sarcastic in my last remark, but the political
>accord on the economic "union" essentially amounts to the entrenchment
>of trade barriers and not their elimination.

Note, regarding the Social and Economic Union, section 4:
    "The provision should not be justiciable."

>I suggest a YES vote is NOT a vote for "Motherhood", but a vote for
>"Satan".  -)!
          ^------ Open your eyes, Gerald!  ;-)


--
Thomas Hood                                                    thood@matrox.com
Montreal
Newsgroups: can.general
From: marc@r-node.gts.org (Marc Fournier - Sys Admin)
Subject: Re: Internet access in T.O.
Organization: R-node Public Access UNIX Information System (416-249-5366)
Distribution: can
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 13:59:14 GMT

In article <390@mindlink.bc.ca> mscott@mindlink.bc.ca (Michael Scott) writes:
>Can you suggest a dial-up access site in Toronto? A friend needs E-mail
>capability; TCP/IP and Usenet groups would be nice too. Budget is a problem,
>though, so reasonable rates would be the best bet.
>
	We don't offer TCP/IP access, but we do have email and usenet
groups...and we are reasonably priced...FREE.

	We do have various access levels for donors, but that just
basically gives access to our other dialin lines...services are
the same.

	The site number is 249-5366...have your friend call us
up and try us out.

Marc
-- 
Marc G. Fournier      | R-node Public Access Unix running UnixBBS 1.03
Etobicoke, Ontario    | 416-249-5366   24hrs 7 days/week   network email
voice: 249-4230       | shell accounts available  1800+ newsgroups  FREE
marc@r-node.pci.on.ca | Telebit WorldBlazer/SupraModem2400/Cardinal 2400 
Xref: sparky can.general:4668 can.politics:7539 ott.general:1145
From: cowan@aqua.ocunix.on.ca (Darin Cowan (root))
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,ott.general
Subject: Re: October 26th Referendum
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 12:21:37 GMT
Organization: The Aquarium, Ottawa, Ontario

wetmore@theochem.uwaterloo.ca (Ross W. Wetmore) writes:


>   On the otherhand there is no good reason not too, and since the result is
> usually a bit more peace and quiet for the rest of us, why not?

That is the yes side motivation that I am afraid too many people have.
Vote yes for imagined peace and quiet.   Sad that those people would see
democracy eroded away in favour of "peace an quiet".
From: robert@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Robert Meunier)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: The Queen. (of Canada?).
Date: 28 Sep 92 18:42:50 GMT
Reply-To: robert@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
Organization: Hydro-Quebec (IREQ)

In article Lt9@ireq.hydro.qc.ca, beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
>In article <1992Sep28.022924.28736@cc.umontreal.ca> boucley@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Boucley Charles) writes:
>>
>> VOTE
>>
>>    Do we wish to abolish British royalty here?
>>
******************************************************************
* YES       *    Boucley@ere.umontreal.ca                        *
****************************************************************** 
* OUI       *    beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca                       * 
****************************************************************** 
* OUI       *    robert@ireq.hydro.qc.ca                         * 
****************************************************************** 

---
Robert Meunier                     Institut de Recherche d'Hydro-Quebec
Ingenieur                          1800 Montee Ste-Julie, Varennes
Internet: robert@ireq.hydro.qc.ca  Qc, Canada, J3X 1S1 
maintainer: BASIC mailing list request to basic-request@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
Newsgroups: can.general
From: marc@meadow.uucp (Marc Riehm)
Subject: Re: October 26th Referendum
Reply-To: marc@meadow.UUCP (Marc Riehm)
Organization: Amdahl Canada Ltd., Software Development Center
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 16:35:30 GMT

In article <BuzDMC.I9J@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
>
>From what I know of the agreement now,
>I will vote NO.
>
>From the reason of the referendum (stopping vote on Sovereignty), 
>I will vote NO.
>
>Because I don't believe in a Canada pro-Quebec (see the number of 
>persons against the fact a minimum 25% representation will compensate 
>a 8% in Senate, because this gives eventually 25% more MP to Quebec, 
>MP that are federalist as it is very well known that the number 
>of souvereignist MP in Ottawa was always very low), I will vote NO.

Let me see if I have this straight: you think that the guaranteed minimum
number of Parliament seats works _against_ Quebec because as her share of the
population drops (if it does) it will increase the number of federalist MPs
coming from Quebec?  Bizarre logic.  I suppose if Quebec were to be guaranteed
50% of the House of Commons seats you would object more strenuously for the
same reason?  How can you say that a guaranteed power share works against
Quebec's cause?  (After all, no-one is forcing the election of federalist
MPs; if the Quebec people vote federalists in over sovereigntists in the next
election, shouldn't that tell you something?

>Because I prefer the risk of independance (yes I think this risk 
>is lower than a yes), I will vote NO.
>
>Because Boubou was not in full shape when concluding the agreement, 
>I will vote NO.
>
>I gave an example for ONE reason I am to vote NO.  I have some more 
>reasons, as you see. 

So Denis is going to vote "No".  Surprise, surprise.

-- 
Marc Riehm      Amdahl Canada Ltd., Software Development Center
                2000 Argentia Road, Plaza 2, Suite 300
                Mississauga, Ont.   L5N 1V8
marc@meadow.UUCP
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,ott.general
From: douglasc@fraser.sfu.ca (Douglas Ming Chong)
Subject: Re: October 26th Referendum
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 18:54:51 GMT

cowan@aqua.ocunix.on.ca (Darin Cowan (root)) writes:

>wetmore@theochem.uwaterloo.ca (Ross W. Wetmore) writes:


>>   On the otherhand there is no good reason not too, and since the result is
>> usually a bit more peace and quiet for the rest of us, why not?

>That is the yes side motivation that I am afraid too many people have.
>Vote yes for imagined peace and quiet.   Sad that those people would see
>democracy eroded away in favour of "peace an quiet".

The decision should not be based on why not.  It should be based on
logical reasoning.  Is the 25% floor fair and just?  Is it fair to
take from other provinces to give to another province to maintain the
25% floor?  Is it fair to a province like B.C. that may in the
next 50 years have 25% of the population of Canada but only get
20% of the representation?  Will the province's people that are under represented think it is fair?

If the answer to all of the questions is YES then it is fair.  But
if any of the questions has a No answer then it is not fair.
For me the answer for all of the questions is NO so the clause is
not even remotely fair.  If it is not fair then it should not
be included in the Constitution.
From: dalnews@ac.dal.ca (Stuart Watson)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: NEW ON DALINFO -- TEXT OF CONSENSUS REPORT
Date: 5 Oct 92 21:32:48 -0300
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

NEW!! on DalInfo:

-- The complete text of the Consensus Report on the Constitution
   (in the Pot-pourri section)
-- Job postings
-- Dalhousie Tigers Home and Away Game Schedule
-- DSA Recreational events
-- Safety Procedures Manual
-- Senate Schedule

AND MUCH MORE!!

To access DALINFO (1) TELNET to ac.dal.ca and LOGIN as DALINFO
                                         or
                  (2) At the What system prompt, enter DAL1 , press
                      the return key a couple of times and enter
                      DALINFO
                                         or
                  (3) dial 494-2500 and proceed as in (2)

***********************************************************
All DalInfo contributors are asked to look at the sections
for which they are responsible to make sure the information
is up-to-date.

Updates should be sent to me (SWATSON) on the IBM or to
DALINFO@AC.DAL.CA on the vax.

Sections have also been created for each bargaining unit (DFA,
DSA, CUPE, IUOE, Admin Group) and only await your input.

If you have any suggestions for additional DALINFO menus, please
call 494-1323 and ask for Stuart or send me a note by e-mail.
-- 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Stuart Watson                       DALNEWS@AC.DAL.CA
Public Relations                    SWATSON@ADM.DAL.CA 
Dalhousie University                DALINFO@AC.DAL.CA
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada        PR@ADM.DAL.CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky can.general:4630 ott.general:1127 can.politics:7402
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.general,ott.general,can.politics
Subject: Re: October 26th Referendum
Date: 28 Sep 92 00:26:53 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 647

From article <Bv5114.B3n@animal.er.bell.ca>, by alex@animal.Bell.CA
 Alex Laney declares:

> 
> Don't let the foggy naysayers make our country disappear!
> 
> VOTE YES ON OCTOBER 26, 1992

Please don't listen to the yeasayers who are holding their noses.

Rejet the sellout of our democratic principles.

VOTE AN EMPHATIC "NO!" on OCT> 26th.

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Xref: sparky can.general:4604 ott.general:1113 can.politics:7321
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.general,ott.general,can.politics
Subject: Re: October 26th Referendum
Date: 26 Sep 92 03:15:42 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 1863

From article <1992Sep23.130907.2554@bmerh85.bnr.ca>, by stu1d46@bmerh255.bnr.ca (Victor Koa):
> 
> How can any Canadian who believes in their country vote no on the 26th???
> 

1) Read the question.

2) Read the "Consensus report".

3) Go put an 'X' in the "NO!" box!

> No, the accord is not perfect by any means, but what do you think is going
> to happen if is not accepted on the 26th? 

Not much!

> Anyone who believes that another
> group of people, elected or not, are going to be able to put together another
> accord that will satisfy everyone accross this great nation has to take a 
> reality check.

Right.

> We've already said no to the Meech Lake accord, one more no
> might just give the PQ and any other seperatists the support they need to
> separate Quebec from Canada.

I'm shaking in my boots. :-)

>  And if you believe that Canada would be better
> off without Quebec...well, I'm not even going to get into that debate.
> 

Presumtive.

> I urge all Canadians to get a copy of the accord, read it carefully, 
> accept its strengths and deficiencies, and vote YES on October 26, 1992.

I urge all Canadians to get a copy of the accord, read it carefully,
try to understand it, realise what it can do to the country if it used
as a basis for negotiations, refuse to be badgered by Mulroney's threats,
agree to sign a contract to buy the house before you know the price, and
vote NO on October 26, 1992.

> I love my country too much to tear it apart.

Good.

Many of us would prefer that it didn't get taken apart, stone by stone,
too.

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.general
From: klassen@sol.UVic.CA (Melvin Klassen)
Subject: Re: Bell wants my $$$ 
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. CANADA
Distribution: can
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 21:37:38 GMT

In article <*> plau@qucis.queensu.ca (Peter S. Lau) writes:
> I received a call yesterday from Bell Canada saying that since my new
> bill is over a hundred dollar and since I am also a new customer, 
> I have to pay the next month bill in advance!
> I asked her what if I don't pay now and wait for the monthly bill? She told me
> if I don't pay in 24 hours, they will have to disconnect my phone service. 
> Or else I could pay $350 for desposit get away from this trouble.

Let's see:
 - you applied to Bell Canada for service,
   and implicitly agreed to their terms and conditions,
 - you now owe money to Bell Canada,
 - you don't want to pay your bill (you want to let the charges appear
   on the next monthly statement, as an "arrears" entry),
 - you have no recent credit-history with Bell Canada,
 - they will cut-off your service if you don't pay,
 - they offered to allow you to "deposit" $350.00 with them,
   and they'll pay you interest (just like a bank pays interest
   on money you deposit in the bank),
 - you declined that offer,
 - you still want service from Bell Canada.

Your only alternatives are to pay what you owe them,
or somehow prove that you are credit-worthy.
Right?
Newsgroups: can.general
From: donald@sq.sq.com (Donald Teed)
Subject: Re: For those who like the German example of highways ...
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 12:52:01 GMT

amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.143927.7740@sq.sq.com> donald@sq.sq.com (Donald Teed) writes:
>>Yes, with aircraft you can have an accident traveling at 0 km/h.

>Huh?
>Even in the Tenerife accident (the Canary Islands one) the planes were
>moving.  On the ground, taxiing, but definitely _moving_!
>At 0 km/h, nothing moves relative to anything else.  Cars, airplanes,
>motor-scooters, chairs, and golf clubs.  So they can't cause a
>collision accident.

I was thinking of 0 km/h relative to a spot on the ground, or also of
accidents without collisions.  Examples: helicopters colliding or just one
losing it's tail rotor.   We are getting way off topic here just to say that
there isn't much analogy between aircraft accidents are highway accidents.

Xref: sparky can.general:4753 can.politics:7925 ott.general:1183
From: walt@orbit.ocunix.on.ca (Walt Sullivan)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,ott.general
Subject: Re:  October 26th Referendum
Date: 4 Oct 92 01:23:52 GMT
Organization: Not much of an Organization

In article <1992Oct01.232156.10478@r-node.gts.org> yung@r-node.gts.org (Amos Yung) writes:
>In article <q74uRB1w165w@aqua.ocunix.on.ca> cowan@aqua.ocunix.on.ca (Darin Cowan (root)) writes:
>>wetmore@theochem.uwaterloo.ca (Ross W. Wetmore) writes:
>>
>>>   On the otherhand there is no good reason not too, and since the result is
>>> usually a bit more peace and quiet for the rest of us, why not?
>>
>>That is the yes side motivation that I am afraid too many people have.
>>Vote yes for imagined peace and quiet.   Sad that those people would see
>>democracy eroded away in favour of "peace an quiet".
>>
>
>I tend to agree with Ross. Vote "yes" just to get the damn thing over with
>and to get the much needed attention from our beloved politicians back to
>the desparate economy.
>

1. Voting "yes" will not "get the damn thing over with". Bourassa has already
   told people in Quebec that, once they vote "yes", there will be further
   negotiations, and further gains for Quebec.

2. Do you really want the same white guys in suits that brought us the
   Free Trade Agreement and are bringing us the North American Free Trade
   Agreement to "pay attention" to the economy?

3. If the referendum is defeated, and if Quebec leaves Canada, what will
   happen to the Members of Parliment who used to represent Canadians in 
   Quebec? I'm thinking of an MP from Baie Como, in particular.

4. Do you think that the constitution, as amended "based on" the Charlottetown
   agreement will leave Canada a governable country? I don't.
   
I beleive that the constitution of a country should set forth the general
principles under which the country will operate. The 160+ clauses of the
amended Canadian constitution contain too many picky details and not enough
general principles. The US Constitution (including the Bill of Rights) is,
in my mind, a model of brevity. Note that I'm not saying that our constitution
should be just like the US constitution, just that the US constitution is
brief, and sets forth general principles.

Have you phoned 1-800-561-1188 and requested your copy of the "Consensus
Report on the Constitution" yet?

--

    Walt Sullivan           walt@orbit.ocunix.on.ca
                            Fido 1:163/109.4
    None of what I say is what my employer says, ever!
    Am I still confused if I'm not, but only THINK I'm confused?
Newsgroups: can.general
From: pt@geovision.gvc.com (Paul Tomblin)
Subject: Re: For those who like the German example of highways ...
Reply-To: pt@geovision.gvc.com
Organization: Not officially GeoVision Systems Inc., Ottawa, Ontario
Distribution: can
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 00:14:33 GMT

donald@sq.sq.com (Donald Teed) writes:

>Here is a posting from rec.autos.driving that might make the
>hair stand up on your neck.  Then again, if you are one of those
>insensitive high octane/adrenaline types, maybe not.
>>
>>I collect data to use to lobby various governments to improve traffic
>>control systems in the fog.  Please send me clippings of the large 
>>pileup on the Autobahn over the weekend.  I would be happy to reimburse
>>you for your costs.  Thank you.

I don't see your point.  Large pile ups occur in the fog on every major
highway in the world, speed limits or no.  I've seen them on Highway 400 in
Ontario, and I've seen them on the M40 Motorway in England.  Why should the
very mention of a pile up in fog on an Autobahn "make the hair stand up on
your neck"?

(I believe the one I witnessed the aftermath of in Ontario had over 25 dead)

People will drive too fast in the fog no matter what the speed limits are.
If you're really worried about fog, remember that eventually, all those
idiots who don't turn on their lights in the fog will have cars with Daytime
Running Lights.  Now if we could only get those rear anti-collision fog
lights like they have in the UK.

-- 
Paul Tomblin, pt@geovision.gvc.com
(This is not an official opinion/statement of GeoVision Systems Inc.)
Anybody who doesn't wear a helmet when biking probably _will_ have their head
examined - by a coroner
Newsgroups: can.general
From: leffler@physics.ubc.ca (Steve Leffler )
Subject: Re: The Queen. (of Canada?).
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 23:55:56 GMT

>In article <1992Sep28.022924.28736@cc.umontreal.ca> boucley@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Boucley Charles) writes:
>
> VOTE
>
>    Do we wish to abolish British royalty here?
>
******************************************************************
*  NO       *    leffler@physics.ubc.ca                          * 
******************************************************************
From: michele@catnix.UUCP (Michele Simond)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: The Queen. (of Canada?).
Date: 3 Oct 92 15:59:05 GMT
	    <BvAxBF.2GA@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>
Organization: Rhinoceros, chargez!


>> VOTE
>>
>>    Do we wish to abolish British royalty here?
>>
******************************************************************
* YES       *    Boucley@ere.umontreal.ca                        *
****************************************************************** 
* OUI       *    beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca                       * 
****************************************************************** 
* OUI       *    robert@ireq.hydro.qc.ca                         * 
****************************************************************** 
* OUI       *    michele%catnix@cam.org                          *
******************************************************************


--
Michele Simond ...... Traductrice ......  B.P.: michele@catnix.UUCP
(514) 671-8820				   OU :	michele%catnix@cam.org

La Liberte n'est pas une marque de yogourt.
Xref: sparky can.general:4654 can.politics:7482 ott.general:1136