HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: argent@iastate.edu (The Great Grendel-Khan)
Subject: Poetry
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 20:39:10 GMT


Okay, a friend is looking to compose a collection of vampire poetry (either
already published or not). Please credit all sources.   If you have any send
them to her.  Or me, and I will forward them.  Please include the word
Poetry in the subject line.

"Anyway, this poetry will not be resold, sold, published for sale, or
distributed beyond the newsgroup by me.  So assure your friends that the
attribution of their submissions is safe and will not profit me."

                                          Karen

Her address is branwen@sage.cc.purdue.edu.  Mine's in the .sig or repl.

Anyone sending a poem and requesting the rest will be given a copy of them.
-- 
The Great Grendel-Khan,  | They called me the fool, they called me the child
Earth Rim Roamer.        | I found an angel of the night;
                         | The voice was low, the look was bright.
argent@iastate.edu       | She looked upon my crown and smiled. -Tennyson-
From: joebg@iastate.edu (umbra)
Newsgroups: alt.gothic
Subject: Re: what is this all about?
Date: 20 Dec 92 19:01:55 GMT
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA

In <BzDK9w.EHG@acsu.buffalo.edu> v108jqur@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (ANTHONY PAUL AVERY) writes:

>In article <lyra.724533570@camelot>, lyra@camelot.bradley.edu (Heather Loresch) writes...
>> 
>>hi!
>>i recently started reading this group and it looks very interesting,
>>but could someone tell me what the whole idea behind the gothic
>>movement is? i'm not really sure about it. thanks a lot!
>>lyra@camelot.bradley.edu
>> 
> "Hey you, yeah you..." I thought I would respond to your question.  As
> with you I just started reading this group and it is alright.  Actually,]
> a friend suggested this group as an outlet to talk to other goths around
> the world.  I guess it is a network devoted to exclusive talk, correspondence,
> and a sort of networking with others who are like us.  
> Being magical, dressing in black, and rebelling against prescribed gender
> roles (all encompassing the goth movement) has been around for centuries
> actually.  From midwives, wisewomen (witches), sorcercers to the avant-
> guarde and DADA movement - monk/gregarian chants to the early sixties
> groups of IRON BUTTERFLY ("POSSESSION"). 

ummm...
ummmm....
well.....
uh....

I just don't think you have your finger on what goth is about. it seems like alt.magick or alt.wicca would work better for your purposes.

There may be some elements of truth in your statement but I just don't see it. 
For me goth is mainly a musical genre that carries with it a social stigma that is more akin to despair then unified rebellion to gender roles (a la A. Jaggar).  Other people may have deliberated more on what exactly goth might be (on this newsgroup even!) and so could better define it. But I DON"T think that any will come up with anything close to your definition.  



-- 
(UMBRA) Black as midnight,|I went home and told my old man how the government
Black as Pitch, Blacker   |suppresses the proletariat from his due. ' I am the
than the foulest witch    |the proletariat, you dumb bastard!' he said,' ..now
-BLIX                     |get the hell inside and do your homework.'j. carroll
Newsgroups: alt.gothic
From: bbs.doktor@tsoft.net (Katie Nutt)
Subject: Bauhaus
Organization: The TSoft BBS and Public Access Unix, +1 415 969 8238
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 02:11:11 GMT

Is there a Bauhaus/Peter Murphy/Love & Rockets ect... mailing list?


Internet: bbs.doktor@tsoft.sf-bay.org   "The birds of leaving call to us
UUCP: ...apple!tsoft!bbs.doktor          Yet here we stand
                                         Endowed with the fear of flight"
                                         --Dead Can Dance
Newsgroups: alt.gothic
From: jc@apple.com (jc)
Subject: Re: Peter Murphy is a feeb
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 01:40:36 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Apple Computer Inc.

In article <1gtob7INN53a@morrow.stanford.edu>, AS.GMH@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gina) writes:
> 
> >[flame bait deleted]        
> >
> Hey, if you don't like Bauhaus, what are you doing reading
> alt.gothic.  

Isn't it obvious?  ...trying to upset you by insulting your gods.
Am I right John?

*yawn*

jc

------------
jc@apple.com
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: Khat
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 07:22:49 GMT

In article <18287@borg.cs.unc.edu>, bell@liszt (Andrew Bell) writes:
>At least NPR did have one guy who explained that it was almost exactly like
>a cup of strong coffee in its effects, and that he had actually tried it.
>One wonders if he'll get fired for violating any sort of "Drug-free workplace"
>rules...

And you are stupid enough to trust a druggie saying things like that?
He was lucky to even survive after a stupid thing like that, taking a
drug, even more so to be able to say anything after that.  Now his
brain is probably half-dissolved and his utterances are worth no more
than those from a random number generator.  I hope his passport is
taken away and he never gets out of Somalia - would serve him right to
be left in a "country" (more like a nuthouse) with those millions of
stupid druggie meatballs who can't even feed themselves without help
from the greatest country on Earth, USA.

//Jyrki
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,talk.politics.drugs,talk.politics.misc
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: Khat
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 11:03:50 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.230943.23276@adobe.com>, mmwang@adobe (Michael Wang) writes:
>Well, CNN seems to have jumped onto the khat-craze bandwagon. Their
>reporter in the capital yesterday has talking about how the new
>contingent of Canadians had to watch out for gun-toting bandits "high
>on narcotics."  Having learned to be mistrustful of our government, I
>would imagine that the U.S. military is purposefully misleading the
>press about the use and effects of the drugs so that when questionable
>killings start coming up, the standard response will be, "well, we
>believe he was on drugs at the time." And poor saps that we are, we'll
>believe it.

Just tie their hands and legs and drop them in an ocean - if they're
on drugs, they will save themselves with the superhuman abilities and
you can just shoot them when they come up.  If not - well, they were
asking for it anyway, since they got caught by the police or military.
Who asked them to come even close to the officials, anyway, they
should've stayed home out of the way.

//Jyrki
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: julie@eddie.jpl.nasa.gov (Julie Kangas)
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:15:00 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.034459.1765@cs.sfu.ca> jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.222528.15763@llyene.jpl.nasa.gov> julie@eddie.jpl.nasa.gov (Julie Kangas) writes:
>>Mob rule.  Gotta love it.
>
>     Yeah, those damn feminists came around with crowbars and
>Molotov cocktails and threatened to burn the radio station down
>unless they stopped playing the song.

	The station was pressured to quit playing the song.
How would you feel if a radio station deep in the Bible Belt was
forced to stop playing a pro-feminist song that was derogative
towards fundamentalists?  (example only:  insert any location and 
subject you feel strongly about).  

Julie
DISCLAIMER:  All opinions here belong to my cat and no one else
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto)
Subject: Re: I've just been repremanded by net.big.brother
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 14:44:27 GMT
Organization: Project GLUE, University of Maryland, College Park

In article <BETSYS.92Dec12211548@ra.cs.umb.edu> betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) writes:
>Around here, we call polite requests TEACHING.

Does your university have the catchall "refusal to obey the reasonable
request of a universal official" in its disciplinary code?  If so, a
'polite request' is an order, no matter what else it may be.  You need
to have that removed from the code before you can reasonably say that
it is not a demand and not a threat.

If it doesn't have it, then a polite request is just a polite
request-- and may be refused without University-sanctioned
consequences.

If a scenario where a sysadmin 'politely requests' a user not to do
something, and the user responds by politely declining the request,
and nothing happens unless what the user was doing was already against
the rules, then the request is a request.  Otherwise, it is merely a
politely phrased order.

>  One of the things we have to teach (have meaning possess) is the
>knowledge that reasoned and persuasive argument is more effective than
>name-calling; that obscenity will drive away more listeners than it
>will impress.

One of the great things about Usenet is that the user can easily
discover this for himself, without intervention from authority.
Even without serious consequences-- it takes a lot of deliberate
rudeness, not just ignorance about which tactics are effective, in
order to get a bad reputation on Usenet.  (Perhaps PSUVM is an exception...)

>   If we tell someone that his behavior makes him sound like a jerk,
>and reflects badly on him, that's an opinion. 

If you also tell him that his behavior may violate university
standards, and ask him to cut it out, that's an order, backed up by
the threat of university sanction.

-- 
Matthew T. Russotto	russotto@eng.umd.edu	russotto@wam.umd.edu
Some news readers expect "Disclaimer:" here.
Just say NO to police searches and seizures.  Make them use force.
(not responsible for bodily harm resulting from following above advice)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: julie@eddie.jpl.nasa.gov (Julie Kangas)
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 20:15:49 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.184201.4130@cs.sfu.ca> jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews) writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.181500.28837@llyene.jpl.nasa.gov> julie@eddie.jpl.nasa.gov (Julie Kangas) writes:
>>	The station was pressured to quit playing the song.
>>How would you feel if a radio station deep in the Bible Belt was
>>forced to stop playing a pro-feminist song that was derogative
>>towards fundamentalists?
>
>     I would probably say "huh, that's typical".  But as I
>don't live in the Bible Belt, and probably wouldn't listen to
>such a station if I did, I couldn't care less.

	You left out the most important part of my post:

"(example only:  insert any location and subject you feel strongly about).  "

	You still haven't answered *that* question.  Try to think
a little beyond this particular circumstance and imagine how you
would like some small group to dictate what you can or can't hear.

>
>     In fact I'm sure it happens all the time with John Lennon's
>"Imagine".  The only reason that the Ottawa station made the
>news is that the Libertarianly Correct crowd picked up on it.
	
	Have you ever heard of it happening?
>
>     Radio stations have playlists.  They normally don't put
>anything on the playlists that will turn off their listeners.
>Rap stations don't play country.  Rock stations don't play
>classical.  Stations don't play "Cop Killer" or "Imagine" or
>"Under My Thumb" or whatever this obscure Beatles song was, if
>they think their listeners won't like it.

	This is not a question of playlists or music outside
the normal type used on a radio station.  
	
	Tell me, wouldn't it be just as easy if a person doesn't
*like* listening to the songs on a particular radio station to
just change to another station?  

	The funny thing is that trying to ban something usually
has the opposite effect.  Quite a few virtually unknown songs
have rocketed to best sellers after some group tries to ban
them.  You would almost think that the banners are in league with
the artist and will get a cut of the profits.

>
>     The Ottawa station just miscalculated, and when a group
>complained (it could have been any group), it decided to change.
>If they had then calculated that they could have gotten *more*
>listeners by standing up to the group, they would have.  They
>obviously didn't, so they didn't.  That's life.

	Sorry, but business don't work like that.  They usually
try to avoid controversy, especially concerning politically "hot"
topics.  I seriously doubt the station conducted any sort of listener 
survey to get everyone opinion's on the subject and then make a decision.
I bet they just caved in to avoid controversy and scaring away
advertisers.  

Julie
DISCLAIMER:  All opinions here belong to my cat and no one else
From: hamm@weejordy.physics.mun.ca (Craig Hamm)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Banning the Beatles?
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:11:00 GMT
Organization: Ocean Sciences Centre


	Yes, a station in Ottawa have refused to replay a song by the Beatles
	after several listeners called in complaining.  Complainers said
	the lyrics might possibly condone violence against women.
	I can't remember the name of the song.  

-- 
  Craig Hamm, Memorial University,|   
  Newfoundland, Ocean Acoustics__/   
  DoD #1500,      ____________/          
  1981 Maxim 650 /            
  _______________|
From: libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Banning the Beatles?
Date: 18 Dec 92 16:51:50 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

erkamp@janus (Bob Erkamp) writes:
: In article <1992Dec10.203840.8210@seachg.uucp>, chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask) writes:
: >I would like to take a moment to distract from this ongoing thread about
: >whether we can censor fools on alt.censorship.  We have here a wonderful
: >topic with vast tracts of un-argued (at least by me) territory, how about
: >some other pertinent threads?
: >
: >For instance, I caught something out of the corner of my ear this morning
: >about a radio station in Ottawa (?) banning a Beatles song, but I didn't
: >get the detail on the article.  Anyone in Canada hear this?  Anyone else
: >have any comments or instances of censorship that would be worth fighting
: >over?
: >
: 
: I heard this as well. I don't recall which song it was but the lyrics implied
: violence to women. The station that played the song got numerous calls from 
: womens groups so they pulled it.
: 
: Bob      

A Beatles song about violence to women?  C'mon.  Does
anybody know anything about this?

Bill
From: peewee@infoserv.com (Philip Stromer)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject:  I've just been repremanded by net.big.brother
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 21:20:57 PST
Distribution: world
Organization: Friends of Lenny Bruce

My account was actually SHUT DOWN for 7 days for making the statement,
on rec.sport.pro-wrestling, that "since all gays have AIDS..." and
then I went into a tirade against a pro wrestler named the Ultimate
Warrior, who I have heard has AIDS.

I was told that this was in VIOLATION of the net.rules, and that I'm
now FORBIDDEN from ever posting again to r.s.p-w.  I was told that
there were too many complaints about my postings, even though I
have refrained from using profanity, and I have refrained from
threats, and I have refrained from advocating violence against
any individual or group of individuals.

But what the hey, I got fired from a job for the same thing, and 
now I'm taking them to court for wrongful termination.  I was fired
for making statements on alt.flame and alt.tasteless, nothing else.

Free speech isn't worth anything anymore, unless it's within the
realm of Political Correctness (tm).  The liberals are in reality
only fair weather friends, as opposed to the far right, who hate
everyone except other far right wingers.  Centrists are the only
real hope for progress.  Vote Libertarian !!!

I defend the rights of anyone to speak their mind, except for NAMBLA.  
I'd execute them on admittance of being a member.  :)

--Philip Stromer (peewee@infoserv.com)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews)
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:24:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.182445.10326@burrhus.harvard.edu> glazier@isr.harvard.edu (Andrew Baker Glazier) writes:
>You're missing his point entirely. As far as I can tell, what he's trying
>to say is that the feminists do not represent a majority or even a
>significant minority of the stations' listeners. What they DO represent is
>a small, extremely vocal group of people who seek to control what the rest
>of the listeners can listen to, which makes them no better than the PMRC or
>the (im)Moral Majority 

     So you would rather that the Citizens' Front for Absolute
Freedom of Speech for All Beatles (CFAFSAB) had called up the
station and pressured them to keep playing the song, when it was
their free business decision to stop playing it?

     Maybe all you people complaining about the station's action
should move to Ottawa and put pressure on them from the other
direction.  It's a nice city but it might be a little cold for you.

--J.
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini)
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
Followup-To: alt.censorship
Reply-To: mec6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:46:36 GMT

chrisb@seachg.UUCP (Chris Blask) writes:

>Just to add fuel to the fire: If there is going to be censorship (there is,
>isn't there?), how do we find the edges?  Where are the limits?

Can we please move this particular fire out of alt.feminism?

rini
Newsgroups: soc.rights.alien,alt.censorship,alt.conspiracy
From: equnlivn@unix1.tcd.ie (Eoin P. O'Coindealbhain)
Subject: Re: "Censorship by Visa Denial"
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 14:59:36 GMT

In <1992Dec14.195323.5586@newstand.syr.edu> greeny@top.cis.syr.edu (J. S. Greenfield) writes:
>(I'm not sure, but I don't think that
>the govt could legally revoke a visa already granted simply because of
>its dislike for some protected expression.)

		Apparently there is some provision in 
	the immigration laws that the government could
	revoke the lifetime work visa of someone that
	attended protests that the US government didn't
	agree with(even if the protest was in a forign
	country).
		I know of a case several years ago(about
	8 years) in which someone w/ a visa home in 
	Ireland on holidays was unable to attend a demo.
	outside the British Embassy(sp),over the 
	Gilford 4 and Bermingham 6,because he was afraid
	that he could loose his visa.
		I'm not sure if this was the law or just
	his interpritation of the law.
		It was also before the Morrison Visa was
	issued and the laws may be different w/ the
	Morrison.
		Any more info would be welcome.	
		
Newsgroups: soc.rights.alien,alt.censorship,alt.conspiracy
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: "Censorship by Visa Denial"
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 19:35:36 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.153411.19788@athena.mit.edu>
wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:

"If the government wants to keep someone out, let them show probable
cause to believe that if allowed to enter he'll perform acts which, if
performed by an American citizen, would be legally suppressible or
punishable."

That's another philosophical difference. It assumes one must hold
foreigners wishing to visit this country only to legal standards
one holds one's own Citizens to.

The position as a generic rule is unsupportable. To take a simple
example, some acts by citizens would, if performed by foreign
visitors be quite illegal--taking a job, for example, without the
government's permission.

David

Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews)
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:42:01 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.181500.28837@llyene.jpl.nasa.gov> julie@eddie.jpl.nasa.gov (Julie Kangas) writes:
>	The station was pressured to quit playing the song.
>How would you feel if a radio station deep in the Bible Belt was
>forced to stop playing a pro-feminist song that was derogative
>towards fundamentalists?

     I would probably say "huh, that's typical".  But as I
don't live in the Bible Belt, and probably wouldn't listen to
such a station if I did, I couldn't care less.

     In fact I'm sure it happens all the time with John Lennon's
"Imagine".  The only reason that the Ottawa station made the
news is that the Libertarianly Correct crowd picked up on it.

     Radio stations have playlists.  They normally don't put
anything on the playlists that will turn off their listeners.
Rap stations don't play country.  Rock stations don't play
classical.  Stations don't play "Cop Killer" or "Imagine" or
"Under My Thumb" or whatever this obscure Beatles song was, if
they think their listeners won't like it.

     The Ottawa station just miscalculated, and when a group
complained (it could have been any group), it decided to change.
If they had then calculated that they could have gotten *more*
listeners by standing up to the group, they would have.  They
obviously didn't, so they didn't.  That's life.

--Jamie.
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk