HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rwh@CS.CMU.EDU (Robert Harper)
Subject: comp.lang.ml: yes
Originator: rwh@GOTTLOB.TIP.CS.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Distribution: news
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:56:28 GMT

I vote "yes" for comp.lang.ml as a moderated newsgroup devoted to discussion
of _all_ dialects and variants of the ML language (as summarized in Greg
Morrissett's RFD).

Robert Harper
-- 

Robert Harper
From: stanley@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.arts.startrek.current - split survey
Date: 21 Jan 1993 21:55:04 GMT
Organization: Coastal Imaging Lab, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: ruby.oce.orst.edu

In article <C17rsF.B3y@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU writes:
>In <93021.091146JSP6@psuvm.psu.edu> Jeffrey S. Payne <JSP6@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>...And here are the results:
>>I was wrong, and the majority grew to a 3 to 1 margin, SHOWING CLEARLY TO ALL
>>that there is considerable support for a split of some form.

>If you think anyone is going to care about a poll with less than 100
>replies then you are quite mistaken. It means nothing.

One where the poll-taker admitted deliberately attempting to skew
the results by posting interim counts. It means less than nothing.
From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Thumper)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.mac.pb
Date: 21 Jan 93 18:36:32 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Organization: Amos Tuck School
Disclaimer: I don't represent Dartmouth and Dartmouth doesn't represent me.

In <1jkuqsINNci3@skeena.ucs.ubc.ca> mathew@unixg.ubc.ca (Mathew Englander) writes:

>I know this was discussed several months ago, but since then lots 
>more PowerBooks have been sold by Apple. I think more PBs are in
>existence than all other Macintoshes combined.

BUZZZZ!  Thank you for playing.

I DON'T THINK SO! I would think there are more Macintosh Classics than
PowerBooks. They haven't sold that many.

> But aside from numeric
>arguments, there are many topics that are of interest to PowerBook users
>and PowerBook users alone. These obviously include hardware peripherals,
>but also the many software packages designed especially for PBs. Many
>threads that are PB-specific just get lost in comp.sys.mac.hardware or
>comp.sys.mac.misc or wherever.

Many threads in comp.sys.mac.* are particular to portable computers, not
just PowerBooks.

Think about it.

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU - Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business

    "Klingons do not allow themselves to be... 'probed.'"
		-Worf
From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Thumper)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.mac.powerbook
Date: 22 Jan 93 15:51:19 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Organization: Amos Tuck School
Disclaimer: I don't represent Dartmouth and Dartmouth doesn't represent me.

In <C17u09.Hu5@utdallas.edu> ggraham@utdallas.edu (GREGORY S GRAHAM) writes:

>I think a Powerbook newsgroup is a great idea for three reasons:

>   1) The Macintosh newsgroups are very large,

Large? No. comp.sys.mac was large, the sub groups are easily manageable.

>   2) Powerbook users represent a large subgroup of Macintosh users, and

I suppose they do. Most of them also own desktop computers. And what about
Duo owners? Portable owners? Outbound owners? You can find ALL sorts of
subgroups but does it really matter?

>   3) The Powerbook presents unique issues that are not relevant to the
>      desktop Macintosh world.

Portable Macintosh computing does, the PowerBook is merely a sub set of
that.

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU - Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business

    If crimefighters fight crime, and firefighters fight fire,
    what do freedomfighters fight?	- George Carlin
From: nrp@csug3.cs.reading.ac.uk ("Independent direction socks" Neilski)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.nt
Keywords: Microsoft Windows NT Win32
Date: 27 Jan 93 13:40:41 GMT
Reply-To: nrp@csug.cs.reading.ac.uk
Organization: University of Reading

magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson) writes:

>In article <nrp.728042773@reading> nrp@csug.cs.reading.ac.uk writes:
>>georged@sequent.com (George Dolbier) writes:
>>>comp.os.ms-windows.nt IS NOT the correct location.
>>Why do you say comp.os.ms-windows.nt is not the correct location?
>>You refer to this system as Windows NT throughout your post.  So why not
>>have ms-windows as part of the name?  i.e.: comp.os.ms-windows.nt?

>Exactly for the reason that George puts forward in his post:

>>Besides, comp.os.nt is not exactly meaningful.  

>Agreed. So what's wrong with comp.os.windows-nt?

Nothing - can I plead "having a headache when I followed up"?

Actually, I prefer "windows-nt" 'cause it matches exactly the name "Windows
NT".

-- neilski

-- 
   "In my book, W-A-L-L   |  _ __        _          |  "This is a Ming vase."  
spells Well." "What book  | ' )  )      //     /    | "Why is it called Ming?" 
is that, then?" "Spalling |  /  / _  o // _   /_  o |  The Bursar tapped the   
     for Begooners."      | /  (_</_<_</_/_)_/ <_<_ |  vase.  It went *ming*.
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 08:27:46 EST
From: Jeffrey S. Payne <JSP6@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.arts.startrek.current - split survey
 <C17rsF.B3y@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> <1jn63oINNfor@gaia.ucs.orst.edu>


In article <1jn63oINNfor@gaia.ucs.orst.edu>, stanley@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (John
Stanley) says:

>One where the poll-taker admitted deliberately attempting to skew
>the results by posting interim counts. It means less than nothing.

Now wait a minute...

I'll admit I didn't know really how many different readers of r.a.s.c there wer
e, I would have never estimated more than 200.  So on that point I'll admit
I was wrong.

I was surprised by the clear 2 to 1 majority of the votes I received, and
suspected that those who wouldn't want a split just were not voting, hoping tha
t it would just go away.  I was hoping to make the results *more* representitiv
e of the real group opinion, hoping that those ignoring the vote would
be concerned by the numbers of split supporters, and come in force against it.
Considering that I have been supporting a split from the beginning, I was
hardly trying to skew the vote in my favor, just trying to get a representative
vote.

I humbly submit to the net.wise.  You obviously know what's best for all of us,
so I'll stop wasting my time trying to find out what the people of this group
really WANT.

Jeff Payne
Penn State Ogontz Campus              |Bitnet:   JSP6@PSUVM
Computer Assisted Learning Center     |Internet: payne@toto.oz.psu.edu
"Why don't you handle your love problems like a man...do some push-ups...
 take a cold shower...buy a new socket set..."
       -Jim Dial to Murphy, _Murphy_Brown_
From: stanley@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: rec.arts.startrek.reviews moderated
Date: 27 Jan 1993 00:39:19 GMT
Organization: Coastal Imaging Lab, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: ruby.oce.orst.edu

In article <C1H87M.4xy@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> hades@Dartmouth.Edu writes:
>    Well, actually there already is a precedent. It's called
>news.announce.newgroups. 

The reason that it is good for n.a.n to be a central posting group for
RFD and CFV is that there is a good chance that not every group that
needs to see one of these postings will have it posted there. 

If you can really say that there is any other group than .current that
should see a review, and that it can't be posted there, then there is
good cause to have a group that is nothing but articles crossposted from
one other group.

>Also, having a moderator set the subject
>line of all reviews that would be posted will go a long way to cleaning
>up the general subject line problem in rec.arts.startrek.*.

This will do very little to clean up the general subject line problem,
for most of the postings in .current will not be reviews crossposted
from .reviews. Most articles will still be posted directly with whatever
Subject: the poster feels compelled to use.

Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.backcountry,rec.boats,rec.scuba,rec.skiing,rec.skydiving,rec.windsurfing,rec.boats.paddle,rec.hunting,rec.climbing,rec.outdoors.fishing
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.EDU (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: rec.outdoors.scuba - BAD IDEA
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division
Date: 28 Jan 93 08:20:16 CST
Followup-To: news.groups
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

rec.outdoors.* may be a bad idea, but is there something that mandates
that everyone opposed create a *different* *thread* in order to do so?

(Especially now that the proposer has withdrawn his proposal.)

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 


Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.os2.{announce,ver1x,beta}
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:13:08 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to mlevis@lonestar.utsa.edu (Mike Levis):
>Introduction:
>	(1)  comp.os.os2.ver1x      (unmoderated)
>	(2)  comp.os.os2.beta       (unmoderated)
>	(3)  comp.os.os2.announce   (moderated)

Well, I typically don't post "me too" messages, but I do want to weigh
in as supporting the creation all three groups.  If _any_ group has
enough traffic to warrant a split, it's comp.os.os2.misc.  And the
three groups above are well-defined, and will prove useful.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
  "you make me want to break the laws of time and space / you make me
   want to eat pork / you make me want to staple bagels to my face /
   and remove them with a pitchfork" -- Weird Al Yankovic, "You Make Me"
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: clint@leland.Stanford.EDU (Clint Cummins)
Subject: Re: RFD: RENAME several groups to rec.outdoors.*
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 23:45:55 GMT

I'm opposed to renaming  rec.climbing  to  rec.outdoors.climbing  .
Costs:
 1. the participants would have to change their .newsrc files.  
 2. the proposed new name is longer.
 3. the new name describes a subset of climbing.  Some climbing these days
    is done indoors, and items on this are posted to rec.climbing.  There is
    probably not enough traffic/interest to support both.  Most people who
    climb indoors also climb outdoors.  I suspect the person who suggested
    the "rename" was probably not aware of indoor climbing.
Benefits:
  none apparent to me.

Clint Cummins
From: dxo@cs.bham.ac.uk (David Oakley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.miniatures
Keywords: miniatures figures ancients napoleonics renaissance naval
Date: 25 Jan 93 12:33:29 GMT
Organization: ASTRAsoft, Stoke-On-Trent England.

A good idea!

David.
                                                                   .___ .
David Oakley, ASTRAsoft shareware producers for the ST            //_ //|
6 Watlands Rd   | "I was in love, once. A ZX81. People said,      || || |
Bignall End     | 'No, Holly, she's not for you.' She was cheap,  || || /\_
Stoke On Trent  | stupid and wouldn't load - at least not for   _/|| ||\_/ |
ST7 8QQ England.| me, anyway."			     Red Dwarf |_/ |_| \_|/
From: gybeho@engin.umich.edu (John Senger)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: moving rec.boats
Date: 25 Jan 1993 14:55:10 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: peugeot.engin.umich.edu

As instructed, I am posting to this group to state that I do not want
rec.boats moved into the .outdoors heirarchy.  It's perfectly fine
where it is, and there is no need to move it.


-- 
John Senger                     

May the seas be calm, the wind at your back, and the beer truck
not far behind
From: marcs@slc.com (Marc San Soucie)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.databases.object
Date: 25 Jan 93 17:56:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: slc.1993Jan25.175627.14403
Distribution: na
Organization: Servio Corp, Beaverton Oregon, US

Richard H. Miller (rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu) writes:

> > 4.  Would there be enough contributors (and not just readers) to the
> >     new group to warrant its creation?

> And here is the crux of the matter; at the current time there are almost no
> implementation of object databases outside of some research projects. (Unisys
> claims that SIM is an object database). Thus comp.databases.research seems
> like the perfect place to discuss the topic until we start seeing some real
> product and then we can discuss the need for a separate group.

I'm sorry that our industry seems to have done a poor job of marketing in 
Houston, but there have been commercial OODBMS products since 1987, and 
there are at least 15 such products available today. OODBMS systems may 
well be good research projects, but they are also fully functional, 
commercially available products.

    Marc San Soucie
    Servio Corporation
    Beaverton, Oregon
    marcs@slc.com
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.programmer,comp.os.os2.networking,comp.os.ms-windows.misc,comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis) (OS/2)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.os2.{announce,ver1x,beta}
Followup-To: news.groups
Reply-To:  mlevis@lonestar.utsa.edu
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 06:39:51 GMT

In article <1jkq8oINNqe2@rodan.UU.NET> mlevis@lonestar.utsa.edu (Mike Levis) writes:
>Introduction:
>
>	This is a Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of three OS/2
>	newsgroups:
>	(1)  comp.os.os2.ver1x      (unmoderated)
>	(2)  comp.os.os2.beta       (unmoderated)
>	(3)  comp.os.os2.announce   (moderated)
[...]
>Schedule:
>
>	This RFD was issued on January 19, and will last for 30 days.  If
>	this RFD is approved, a CFV will be issued on February 19, and
                               ^^^^^
>	the voting period will end at 11:59 pm (CST), March 12.

Attention everyone:

People have sent me votes already, or have asked me the procedure for
voting.  A CFV stands for ``Call for votes''.  When it is time for
voting, I will issue a CFV with complete voting instructions.  If
you have already sent in your votes, I cannot accept it.  You will
have to vote again after I issue the CFV on February 19.

I also received suggestions for changing the charters.  I am
glad to hear what you have to say, but please post them to news.groups
so that everyone can judge your suggestions (I am only a lowly vote
keeper, and not some net.authority with special powers).  RFD stands for
``Request for discussion''.  Everyone interested needs to be involved
in the discussion.  (In fact, I wrote the charters based on discussion
in comp.os.os2.advocacy)

Don't take this as flames -- it's just the proper procedure.  Remember:
   (1) RFD = Request for discussion
      discuss the charters of newsgroups on news.groups for 30 days
   (2) CFV = Call for votes
      vote for the newsgroups for 21 days
   (3) Results
      at the end of the voting period, the voting outcome is posted

Thanks for your attention.  :-)

-- 
======= Mike Levis   mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu =======
::  ftp ftp-os2.nmsu.edu (128.123.35.151) for OS/2  ::  .--.
::  software & information.   Get /pub/os2/00Index  :: (OS/2)
::::::::  & /pub/os2/all/info/faq/faq20i.zip  ::::::::  ~--~
From: stanley@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.arts.startrek.current - split survey
Date: 22 Jan 1993 20:41:14 GMT
Organization: Coastal Imaging Lab, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: ruby.oce.orst.edu

In article <93022.082746JSP6@psuvm.psu.edu> Jeffrey S. Payne <JSP6@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>In article <1jn63oINNfor@gaia.ucs.orst.edu>, stanley@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (John
>Stanley) says:
>
>>One where the poll-taker admitted deliberately attempting to skew
>>the results by posting interim counts. It means less than nothing.
>
>Now wait a minute...

No, you wait a minute. You admitted that you posted the partial results
hoping to spur those opposed to a split who didn't care enough to vote
into voting. That is skewing the results.

>I was surprised by the clear 2 to 1 majority of the votes I received, and
>suspected that those who wouldn't want a split just were not voting, hoping tha
>t it would just go away.  I was hoping to make the results *more* representitiv
>e of the real group opinion, 

You don't do that by trying to get one side or the other more interested
in the poll, you do it by getting EVERYONE more interested. You wanted
to get more no-split people active, and that is called "skewing the
results".

>I humbly submit to the net.wise.  You obviously know what's best for all of us,
>so I'll stop wasting my time trying to find out what the people of this group
>really WANT.

Just what the hell is this supposed to mean? You ran a bogus straw poll,
trying to skew the results (by your own admission), and you were told
that. How does that convert into "us" telling "you" what is best for
"all of us"?

Begging the question, of course, of who "us" and "you" are.
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.nt
Keywords: Microsoft Windows NT Win32
Date: 27 Jan 1993 21:15:20 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <917@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>It is not a derivative except in that MSWin was the ancestor of the
>user interface.  The OS itself is entirely different, as is the
>programming API.  You may as well say that MS-Windows is a derivative
>of MS-DOS, because Windows runs on top of DOS.

The programming API isn't all that different; it's just 32-bit versions of the
Windows API. Just ask Microsoft, who's busy claiming it's easy to port apps
from Windows to NT with just a recompile.

The issues relating to the OS itself are different enough to warrant a new
group. The issues relating to everything else are similar enough to MS Windows
to warrant placement in the Windows hierarchy. 

>I vote for comp.os.windows-nt ... separate but equal.

Ah. Just like rec.arts.manga.

>We may wish to review some of the other comp.os groups and see
>what sub-groups have proved useful & establish a complete
>hierarchy from the start.

...or we may want to put NoT under the existing MS Windows hierarchy and take
advantage of the groups that are already there.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
    "begin 666 foo 266]U(&AA=F4@;F\@;&EF92X: ` end" -- Daniel Drucker
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.nt
Keywords: Microsoft Windows NT Win32
Date: 27 Jan 93 15:40:42 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <8549@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <1993Jan26.120211.6093@pollux.lu.se> magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson) writes:
>>Naming the group comp.os.ms-windows.nt would imply that Windows NT is
>>some sort of derivative of MS Windows, which it is NOT. We should try
>>to keep the namespace hierarchy meaningful.
>
>Fire up Windows NoT. Then tell me it isn't a derivative of MS Windows.
>
>For that matter, Microsoft is saying that NT is a derivative; if not, they
>don't have a leg to stand on in their battle with Novell to include the
>NetWare stuff in NT.

It is not a derivative except in that MSWin was the ancestor of the
user interface.  The OS itself is entirely different, as is the
programming API.  You may as well say that MS-Windows is a derivative
of MS-DOS, because Windows runs on top of DOS.

I vote for comp.os.windows-nt ... separate but equal.

We may wish to review some of the other comp.os groups and see
what sub-groups have proved useful & establish a complete
hierarchy from the start.

comp.os.windows-nt.misc
comp.os.windows-nt.advocacy
comp.os.windows-nt.programming
comp.os.windows-nt.???	...

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Why do we never get an answer		|
when we're knocking at the door?	|	-Richard Hartman	
because the truth is hard to swallow 	|	hartman@uLogic.COM
that's what the war of love is for.	|
From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Brian Hughes)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.mac.pb
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:39:41 GMT
Reply-To: hades@Dartmouth.Edu
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Disclaimer: Personally, I really don't care who you think I speak for.
Moderator: Rec.Arts.Comics.Info

mathew@unixg.ubc.ca (Mathew Englander) writes:

>I don't use xrn, and I find it tedious and time-consuming to scan
>three or four newsgroups for postings about PowerBooks. The mac
>groups are so glutted already that a separate group for PB-users would
>be a great help.

    Glutted? The comp.sys.mac.* groups are not even close to being
glutted with traffic that people need to start talking about another
split. If people are this interested in Powerbook only discussions then
I think that a mailing list is definately in order. Hell, I would even
volunteer to set up such a list as a Listserv mailing list (Dartmouth
happens to be a Listserv site ;).

>I know this was discussed several months ago, but since then lots 
>more PowerBooks have been sold by Apple.

    So? How many of those new owners do you think actually read the net?
My guess would be pretty few.

>I think more PBs are in existence than all other Macintoshes combined.

    Um.. no. This is just totally off base. There is no way that
Powerbook sales have even come close to Plus/SE sales. Powerbooks have
been around for a little over a year, but the Plus/SE style Mac was
sold for something like 6 or 7 before it was replaced with the
Classic/Classic II which is still a big seller for Apple.

>But aside from numeric arguments, there are many topics that are of
>interest to PowerBook users and PowerBook users alone. These obviously
>include hardware peripherals, but also the many software packages
>designed especially for PBs. Many threads that are PB-specific just get
>lost in comp.sys.mac.hardware or comp.sys.mac.misc or wherever.

    The biggest problem I have with this proposal is the fact it is
completely incompatible with the way the comp.sys.mac.* hierarchy is
designed to work. It doesn't make sense to have a group that covers
everything about Powerbooks when all of the other groups are trying to
handle broad topics of discusison like applications, hardware,
communications and system software. This is why a mailing list would
work so well.

--
-Brian V. Hughes 
"December 1 - What begins as a friendly transitional get-together between
 the Bushes and the Clintons ends in tragedy when Millie ralphs up what
 is later identified as Socks the cat." Dave Barry 1992 Year in Review
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Thursday, 21 Jan 1993 15:46:22 EST
From: Solipsist at Large <IK20001@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.miniatures
 <1jmsgkINN8r8@charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu>

I have no problem with the proposed rec.games.miniatures.  However,
I'd like a list of those `several groups, mailing lists and digests'
where minatures discussion is taking place.  The implication is that
discussion is very common, while I've never noticed more than a few
token messages in rec.games.frp.misc or rec.games.board.  I may be
wrong, of course.

I'm not debating the usefulness of the group -- I'm just looking for
the alluded-to evidence.
--
Eric Alfred Burns                        "Life is full of decisions
Solipsist at Large                        but you never get to make any."
"It's all in your mind"
IK20001@maine.maine.edu                           --Linus Van Pelt
Newsgroups: news.groups