HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: Kicked out of a.f.d-q?  I don't think so
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 19:55:48 GMT

patrick@growler.owlnet.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
>nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
>   aa680@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Vern Morrison) writes:
>   >        I've never before heard anyone claim to have been kicked out of 
>   >an unmoderated newsgroup.

>       This is admittedly the first time I've ever heard anyone make that 
>   claim as well, but I've seen a couple of cases in which hordes of people 
>   have posted "requests" for other dissenting persons to butt out and leave 
>   a group until they have "learned" more appropriate opinions. Consider the 
>   case of Steve Chaney or Jack Schmidling. Basically these two guys have 
>   gotten unpopular enough that they can no longer hold fruitful discussions 
>   here because people are so busy berating them for past transgressions or 
>   trying to put words in their mouthes in order to create new offenses. Both 
>   of these individuals have been effectively "kicked out".

>Really?  It seems to me that the individuals in question made their own
>decision to leave.  They could have stayed, but they didn't.  In case you're
>too busy defending them to notice, those two you mentioned can't hold a
>worthwhile discussion for one basic reason:  they have no interest in
>holding one in the first place.  

    Yeah, they could have stayed and reaped the further rewards of their 
"popularity" but they didn't. I have no real interest in the right or wrong 
of Steve or Jack's positions, and I was not defending them or anything they 
said. My whole point is that, although technically speaking they have a 
right to say whatever they want, they have managed through a combination 
of the ideas they presented and the methods they used to present the ideas 
to make themselves unpopular. So unpopular in fact that they prefer to bug 
out rather than stay around for repeated bludgeoning in repayment for their 
past transgressions. In effect, they *have* been kicked out. You may be 
correct that they deserve it, but that's not relevent to the point I was 
trying to establish which was that they are gone mostly as a result of peer 
pressure.

>It'd be nicer if you'd bother learning just what the two people you're
>defending did to earn their reputation...

    Oh, calm down, Pat. I'm defending their right to have their say, not 
*what* they say. As far as Steve or Jack are concerned I think that their 
faults aren't significantly worse than some of the dumb stunts I've been 
involved in.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
From: dodsonsl@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Whining bastards
Date: 31 Dec 92 08:46:11 -0600
Organization: Memphis State University

In article <1ht3n0INN70g@shelley.u.washington.edu>, ryanm@hardy.u.washington.edu (Ryan Mcneilly) writes:
> In article <1992Dec30.181412.6382@wdl.loral.com> bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com writes:
>>I wouldn't be so pissy about this if you dittoheads would just admit
>>that you simply don't want the poor to receive any help whatsoever
>>from the government.  Jeez.  At least the Libertarians can do that.
>>Get some spine, you simpering fools.
> 
> 
> You don't seem to understand that we conservitives (most) do care about
> the poor, hungry, and homeless.  We just don't think the Fed Gov should
> solve the problem by throughing in  money and socialistic jobs.  Instead
> we give through private organizations or directly to bypass the waste and
> fraud that has run rampid through congress and the white house.

In most times of prosperity, private donations to charities increased. This
didn't happen in the 1980's. Bush's 'thousand points of light' never really
took off.

> I think many would agree (correct me if I am wrong) that a small tax hike
> would be tollerable if the money actually went to the hungry and homeless,
> especially the children.  The parents should get vocational training
> instead of a dinkey pay nothing job where they are stuck.  Only after they
> have skills usefull to this country will they be usefull.  --Ryan

Sounds like you might be a Clinton supporter. 
Don't faint, I was only kidding :) 

-Scott

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: The "L" word
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 03:12:51 GMT

Robert  Johnston (rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu) wrote:
: Economically speaking, a liberal is someone who thinks that it is the 
: governments role to allow for the greatest median standard of living,
: while a conservative feels that it is the governments role to allow for 
: the greatest mean standard of living
: 

My most simplistic (i.e. shortest amount to type) definition of liberalism
and conservatism:

1.	Liberals believe in active government
	Conservatives believe in passive government
2.	Liberals would have governmental legislation telling us what to do.
	Conservatives would have governmental legislation telling us what
		NOT to do
3.	Liberals believe government can force people to be equal
	Conservatives believe that people should have equal opportunity
		to succeed
4.	Liberal agenda seeks short term solutions to current problems
	Conservative agenda seeks long term solutions to current problems
5.	Liberals believe that global solutions by the central government
		work equally well for Californians as for Arkansans
	Conservatives believe in that California and Arkansas have their
		own unique problems that are better solved on the local level.
6.	Liberals believe that the government knows how to spend the money
		we earn better than we do.
	Conservatives believe in exactly the opposite.
7.	Liberals believe that the government should drive the social agenda
		of the nation
	Conservatives believe that people in smaller groups should drive
		their own social agenda
8.	Liberals believe that the quality of life is determined by share of
		the nation's GNP
	Conservatives believe that quality of life is improved by increasing
		the nation's GNP
9.	Liberals believe that because of obstacles, people can not succeed.
	Conservatives believe that in spite of obstacles, people succeed.
10.	Liberals believe that the free market fails because the rich get
		richer.
	Conservatives believe that the free market succeeds because those
		everyone gets richer in the long run.
11.	Liberals use "emotional appeal" arguments to further their agenda.
	Conservatives use logic and common sense to further their agenda.

When a liberal realizes #6 above is true, he becomes a conservative :)
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Military Efectiveness and Gays
Date: 4 Jan 1993 01:11:35 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
Distribution: world
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
NNTP-Posting-Host: zorba7.larc.nasa.gov

In article <1992Dec27.022755.20837@microsoft.com>, bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob 
Sarver) writes:
> (ts2a+@andrew.cmu.edu)

> /> A point of fact and history:  Alexander the Great was gay and it seems 
the
> /> army he ran had no problems in being effective. 
> 
> 
> /Well yeah, but his raucous partying caused his death and helped plunge
> /the civilized world into many years of meaningless warfare.
> 
> 1.  Prove that his parties were the direct cause of the downfall of the
> civilized world.  Provide evidence as to why greed, bad statemanship,
> failure to select appropriate successors, etc. are all invalid causes
> of this plunge.
> 
> 2.  Prove that the results would have been any different had he been 
> a straight man throwing such "parties".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> /(ts2a+@andrew.cmu.edu)
> /One example does not make a case, and your example is less than ideal.
> 
> I would say that your rebuttal is even less ideal than this other
> fellow's example.

Describe the Universe.  Give 3 examples.

Mike :^)

Mike Rowland (Contractor),  MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l)
Subject: Re: So, anyone want to talk about Rush Limbaugh around here?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 00:48:44 GMT

graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM) writes:

>In article <nate.1008@psygate.psych.indiana.edu>, nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes...
>>mjenkins@alfred.carleton.ca (Michael Jenkinson) writes:
>>>...my killfile is huge.
>> 
>>    Mine is not, but this morning I really kind of regret it.
>> 
>>    I've paged through almost 200 articles and this is the first one to 
>>even make a token attempt to talk about Rush (Yeah, Michael!).
>> 
>>    Just for the record, let me state that I'm really, really bored with 
>>        1) the "Gays in the Military" thread
>>        2) the "Sexuality/Lifestyles" thread
>>    and 3) everything to do with Steve Chaney (the new cross-post king)
>> 
>>    At this point I can only hope against hope that the people who have 
>>been sustaining those tired old topics will find new interests once the 
>>new semester starts. Thank heavens Rush will be back on the air in 24 hours 
>>and 15 minutes.
>> 
>>--
>>Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
>>Psychology Department               Indiana University
>>nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu

>I'll second all of the above, Nathan. :-)

>Jim Graham 

>        -> ->Disclaimer: I do not speak for my company. <- <-
>                          Neither do they speak for me.
> ______________________________________________________________________
>| Internet: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu                              |
>|           dolmen!jgraham@moose.cs.indiana.edu                        |
>| BBS:      The PORTAL DOLMEN BBS/ParaNet ALPHA-GAMMA (sm) (9:1012/13) |
>|            (812) 334-0418, 24hrs.                                    |
>|______________________________________________________________________|


This is what happens when Rush goes on vacation :)

Steve
-- 

Steve Kellmeyer 
kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
From: parker@ehsn17.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 22:28:51 GMT

dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>In article <1992Dec29.191504.19413@rchland.ibm.com> 
>jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl) writes:
>>dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>>> Actually, most pro-lifers that I know support social
>>> programs like WIC and foodstamps.  And the poor tend 
>>> to be the strongest opponents of abortion.  

>> Not according to many posts already in this group.

>It's hard to tell your point here.  You're either claiming 
>that you know the opinions of my pro-life friends better 
>than I do, or you're making a generalization about 
>millions of pro-lifers based upon a few posts in this
>newsgroup.  Which is it?  

It's C: He's saying that the poor do *not* tend to be the strongest opponents
of abortion "according to many posts already in this group".  Wake up, Doug.
(I have no idea whether he is right about that.)

>>Jared Dahl

>Doug Holtsinger

-Rob
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Subject: Re: Conservative Values (Re: New group proposal:  alt.conservative.foru
Reply-To: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 16:17:24 GMT

>In article <1992Dec17.111544.23826@hemlock.cray.com> rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>>
>>In article <1gq80kINNb9@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu>, pearsodc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU (if God's your father then call home!) writes:
>: Russ Anderson writes in response to my post:
>: >What are "conservative values"?
>: >
>: >Take the following issues:
>: >
>: (several awesome issues addressed)


Most of the examples presented - maybe all - can be analyzed in terms
of the conflict between those who follow the libertarian tradition
and those who follow a right-wing interventionist tradition. This is
indeed the principle dilemma of the Republican party, and creates for
them the same sort of 'identity crisis' that has bedeviled the
Democrats since 1980 or so.

The two leading Presidential candidates-in-waiting, Kemp and Quayle,
represent these two wings rather explicitly, and it will be interesting
to see how things shake out during the next few years.


Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bruce-becker,alt.fan.john-palmer,alt.config,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: newgroup comp.society.folklore
From: news@doqbox.aeme.gen.nz
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 19:06:44 +1300
Keywords: BOGUS MAN
Summary: Hostile newgrouping

A hostile unmoderation of comp.society.folklore perhaps???


=================
From: news@tygra.Michigan.COM (USENET News Manager)
Newsgroups: alt.config,comp.society.folklore.ctl
Subject: newgroup comp.society.folklore
Date: 17 Dec 92 02:02:17 GMT
Control: newgroup comp.society.folklore
Organization: CAT-TALK Conferencing System
Article-I.D.: tygra.1992Dec17.020219.23751news

As per voting.
   FOR: 729
   AGAINST: 151
   FOR COUNT > 100? YES

=======================================

This isn't as per the published results!




Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
From: Gerry_Furseth@mindlink.bc.ca (Gerry Furseth)
Subject: Re: MH: 5th in a 9-part Trilogy
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 00:23:57 GMT

Based on my reading of his books, I would tend to doubt that DA himself has
decided how many books will be in the series.
Given that the Mac Quantum costs a large pile of money, I would expect a few
more.

Always opinionated, sometimes humble:
gerry
From: marson@pembvax1.pembroke.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
Subject: MH: 5th in a 9-part Trilogy
Date: 1 Jan 93 01:49:14 GMT
Organization: Pembroke State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: pembvax1.pembroke.edu

I've just completed the unabridged taped version of MOSTLY HARMLESS.
I like to listen to Adams read his own material when I travel.
I have also been monitoring the comments about MH.

Some comments:
   I didn't get the impression from the tone of Adams' voice that
   the ending of part five of the trilogy was negative.  In fact,
   I got the impression that he opened the door for a wide variety
   of possibilities.

   In The Restaurant at the End of the Universe, Zaphod Beeblebrox
   communicates with dead his great-granddad.  Perhaps part seven of
   the Trilogy will open with Zaphod communicating with Trillian,
   but gets Arthur instead.

   I suspect that there will be NINE parts the the Hitchhikers
   trilogy.  Further, I suspect that the 9-part trilogy will end 
   with Arthur's home being replaced with a bypass.

Happy New Year!

Dr. Steve
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
From: bena@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Ben Aveling)
Subject: Re: Mostly Harmless
Organization: Monash University General Access Unix
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 12:48:04 GMT

AUTSW@ASUACAD.BITNET wrote:
: Well, I just finished Mostly Harmless and haven't been monitoring the general
: concensus on the book so far... I didn't like the ending... and I just can't
: see everything ending that easilly for Arthur Dent, so I'm assuming there
: will be a 6th book in the increasingly innaccurately named Hitchiker's
: Trilogy...

I'll have to read-re it I admit, but spoilers ... 
The guide has not dismantled the earth in the past - people still know
about it - eg Vogons know it is destroyed - ie they know it once
existed.  Even though no earth now exists - they used to and may again
some time in the future - though I don't think DA wants to.

Question - that reverse time engineering - do you think the Magratheians
used it ?

	Just wondering,

	Ben ( bena@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au )
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
From: daniel@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Daniel Bowen)
Subject: Deeper Meaning of Liff
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 02:07:37 GMT

Is it just the edition I have that has "Fairymount" (the polite word for
buggery) missing?  It's in the first book, but not the second.  Maybe
they tried to keep it clean?  Oh yeah, and for the definition of
"Fovant", they've changed the word "fuck" to "bugger".

And while I'm complaining, they've also changed the definition for
"Clackavoid"... I think it's much better suited to Blake's Seven..


Daniel Bowen
-- 
Daniel Bowen, Monash University |
            Melbourne Australia |          POPE GETS GRIT IN MOUTH!
   daniel@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au |
      TCWF: tcwf@gnu.ai.mit.edu |                                    [TCWF]
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
From: pcxkrm@unicorn.nott.ac.uk (K.R.Marshall)
Subject: Re: Trillian TV question
Organization: Cripps Computing Centre, University of Nottingham
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 13:52:01 GMT

In article <BzG9p4.9uu@newcastle.ac.uk> C.L.Gannon@newcastle.ac.uk (C.L. Gannon) writes:
>
>In article <BzFG7q.9M1@brunel.ac.uk>, lw92csb@ccws-36.brunel.ac.uk.ac.uk (Charanjit S Bharj) writes:
>>PS MY NAME IS CHARANJIT...OVER HERE ACROSS THE POND IN LONDON
>
>
>      IT'S NOT A POND, IT'S A FUCKING OCEAN !!!!
>
>
>              LEO.

I think we have a severe CAPS LOCK failure epidemic - quick, everyone
replace their keyboards before Christmas or it may be too late... :-)

Keith.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Mummy was an asteroid, Daddy was             | Keith Marshall
a small, non-stick kitchen utensil..."        | pcxkrm@unicorn.nott.ac.uk


Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
From: hauben@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Michael Hauben)
Subject: Why is Arthur Dent Saved?
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 07:50:59 GMT

Hello, I am rereading the first book, Hitchhikers Guide, and have
a question. Is there any reason that Ford Prefect decides to take
poor Arthur along with him?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Michael Hauben    CC '95      | Write ME for the NEW Amateur Computerist   |
| hauben@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu | Special Supplement on Usenet News called   |
| am893@cleveland.freenet.edu   | "The Wonderful World of Usenet News"       |
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
From: leveret@warren.demon.co.uk (Nick Leverton)
Subject: Re: Trillian TV question
Reply-To: leveret@warren.demon.co.uk
Distribution: world
X-Mailer: cppnews $Revision: 1.20 $
Organization: Indexed; Access: Random.
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 10:16:10 +0000

In article <BzFG7q.9M1@brunel.ac.uk> lw92csb@ccws-36.brunel.ac.uk.ac.uk writes:
>PS MY NAME IS CHARANJIT...OVER HERE ACROSS THE POND IN LONDON

That's be the ... oh, excuse me ....

THAT'D BE THE ROUND POND, WOULD IT ?

n.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
From: "davidr turner" <davidr.turner@canrem.com>
Subject: mostly harmless
Reply-To: "davidr turner" <davidr.turner@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: alt
Date: 31 Dec 92 21:43:27 EST

RMF>I thought he told too much of what actually happened.  Sure it was
RMF>cryptic, but the last couple pages seemed (to me) to explain pretty
RMF>much the whole series.
RMF>     ...Not to mention the fact that he practically beats the reader
RMF>over the head with the "King" thing.  If you, like Arthur, don't know
RMF>what king Ford is referring to by the time they get into the pink
RMF>spaceship, you haven't been paying attention.
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
        ...or been to a supermarket checkout line for years...

Later... (or is it sooner, or ever, or never...?  DA has fried my
logic circuits...)

---
  OLX 2.1 TD  MSI - Bringing it all together in '92
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Wednesday, 30 Dec 1992 13:46:40 MST
From: <AUTSW@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
Subject:    Mostly Harmless

Well, I just finished Mostly Harmless and haven't been monitoring the general
concensus on the book so far... I didn't like the ending... and I just can't
see everything ending that easilly for Arthur Dent, so I'm assuming there
will be a 6th book in the increasingly innaccurately named Hitchiker's
Trilogy...
From: ensalada@cats.ucsc.edu (Kevin Charles Rubio)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
Subject: Re: Mostly Harmless
Date: 31 Dec 92 04:05:39 GMT
Reply-To: keeper@deeptht.armory.com
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: si.ucsc.edu


In article <92365.134640AUTSW@ASUACAD.BITNET> AUTSW@ASUACAD.BITNET writes:
>Well, I just finished Mostly Harmless and haven't been monitoring the general
>concensus on the book so far... I didn't like the ending... and I just can't
>see everything ending that easily for Arthur Dent, so I'm assuming there
>will be a 6th book in the increasingly innaccurately named Hitchiker's
>Trilogy...


I, too, have read it at long last, and actually liked the ending.

spoiler time!




Of course, I knew what the ending was long before reading, but still...
It's rare to have a somewhat unhappy ending.

I liked how the total elimination of Earth through all possible
possibilities also eliminated the very object that made the
elimination possible ... or did it go off to someone else?  You
can't be sure.  I like to think it disappeared, so that the
elimination of Earth saved the universe from unraveling.

Arthur Dent was as Arthur Denty as always -- I could hear Simon Jones
doing it marvellously throughout, too.

--
Email replies must be sent to keeper@deeptht.armory.com
From: nightsng@anarky.tch.org (Nightsong)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
Subject: Re: Mostly Harmless
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 93 15:28:20 PST
Organization: The Canned Ham, San Jose, CA.

previously from tagg@hg.uleth.ca (Nathaniel Tagg) --
>      Indeed, this is always what I have found so delightful about D.A. I grew
> up with the HHG, and I am a great SF fan, and would-be physicist, so I feel
> some affinity with how DA thinks, or at least writes.  I can usually see wher
> he is heading before he gets there, and it gives me a great feeling of
> satisfaction to have figured it out, without haveing to do all that tedious
> mucking about with denoument.
> 
> ------- Nat

I agree with you, although most of my family is confused by his writing 
style, I think it makes more sense than most.  Again, this is probably 
due to the way I think which has ALWAYS confused my family.  By the way, 
after reading "Mostly Harmless", my dad has taken to calling me "Random" 
which really bothers me, as I do not go around throwing rocks at people 
or other things she does.  I also noticed that on the night when I read 
that book I started explaining things in great detail and explaining in 
greater detail why they were not relevant to anything that we were 
discussing or was happening.  This always seems to happen when I read his 
books. :)
 
 -Nightsong
From: johne@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (John Eaton)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
Subject: Re: Mostly Harmless
Date: 3 Jan 93 18:57:52 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard VCD
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Robert M Funk (rfunk@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) wrote:
: 
: I thought he told too much of what actually happened.  Sure it was
: cryptic, but the last couple pages seemed (to me) to explain pretty
: much the whole series.
--------------
Oh?       

What was the Grebulon's mission?

What was in the "Blind Spot" that Ford found in the guides computer?

Where was the  Arthur II that corresponded to Tricia McMillian?


John Eaton
!hp-vcd!johne
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams