HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: 3040_3744@uwovax.uwo.ca
Subject: Dave Lawrence's truth and Basalat's role
Organization: University of Western Ont, London
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 02:13:11 GMT

I have seen now the official comments from the moderator of News.groups about 
the cancellation of CFV of Soc.Relegion.Islam.Ahmadiyya. Although rest of the
issue is prety much seems to be confusion caused by the two CFV postings
received by Dave Lawrence which caused this problem. But I think it is more
than that and it is the double role played by the moderator of
Soc.Relegion.Islam who actually made whole thing a mess. If any one look the
entire process carfully it will be obvious to him that how Basalat Ali Raja
played double role in this process. First he posted a fraudlent CFV submitted
by Mr. Jaffery who pretended that he was a neutral vote taker and wanted to
solve this issue (which he is not). This CFV was then cancelled by Dave
Lawrence who also sent another CFV by Nabeel Rana which have a note on it from
Dave Lawrence this was then posted in addition to other groups on
Soc.Relegion.Islam. However, within 48 hours of this official CFV posting Mr.
Basalat Ali Raja  reposted the CFV submitted earlier by Mr. Jaffrey which he
himself cancelled after receiving the note of Dave Lawrence that it was wrong
CFV. Now the question to be asked by Basalat Ali Raja is that who gave him this
authority to repost the CFV of Mr. Jaffery once it was cancelled. Was not he
aware that Jaffrey's CFV was wrong and he was not official vote taker? Under
what circumstances he reposted a CFV which was fraudulent? Why he reposted the
CFV of Jaffrey while he did not receive any official note from the moderator of
the news.group? Was't he fully aware the consequences of all this action? How
much he was involved with Mr. Jaffrey to hijack this democratic process? These
are the few questions which clearly shows that Mr. Basalt Ali Raja was fully
involved to malignate this whole process. He intentially reposted Mr. Jaffrey's
CFV to confuse this situation and to eventually cancell the CFV since he was
fully aware that the group would be approved of the process will continue. He
was fully aware that if this CFV will be cancelled than lots of people who
voted this time will get fed up and than will not particpate in voting process
in future. He was also fully aware that this will give him enough time to
intimidate some yes voters to give a no vote by personal e-mail contact through
the addresses obtained by Mr. Jaffrey. He was also fully aware that by this
time he will be able to keep posting misinformation on the Soc.Relegion.Islam
and thus he will get more no votes from innocent muslims who would belevie on
those wrong informations. 

I would therefore, Suggest that we should take very strong measures to avoid in
future such kind of happenings. Mr. Basalat Ali Raja's role should be exposed 
to every one. He  was to play neutral role but instead he took adapted means to
malignate this democratic process.


Hameed Mirza
     
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: Getting information
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 15:37:06 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen):
>My point is that if a LOT of other people tell you "you should have asked  
>someonse else", most people will stop being inquisitive after awhile.

No one who I'd respect would do so.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
                 just another elitist Usenet administrator
Xref: sparky news.groups:21985 comp.sys.m68k:1360 comp.sys.intel:2255
From: cpg@cs.utexas.edu (Carlos M. Puchol)
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.m68k,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Is there a general fault-tolerance news group?
Date: 16 Nov 1992 07:28:24 -0600
Organization: Department of Computer Sciences, UT Austin
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: priddy.cs.utexas.edu
Keywords: fault tolerance

In article <lg5phmINNsu9@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu> shuford@cs.utk.edu (Richard Shuford) writes:
>While we were discussing the creation of 'comp.sys.stratus', several
>people expressed a desire to see the creation of a related newsgroup.
>The best name proposed was 'comp.arch.fault-tolerant', and its charter
>would be broad enough to encompass systems that are configured for
>"high availability" (the latest buzzterm) as well as systems that are
>designed from the ground up for "hard" fault-tolerance.

There are many terms that would fit the bill, like dependability,
responsiveness, etc ... but if it doesn't seem too stupid, why don't
we call it just comp.fault-tolerance ?

I think this would broaden the audience at first ... maybe later, if
needed there could be c.f-t.software, c.f-t.hardware ... etc.

Just a suggestion, IMHO it would be better ...

Thanks for your time,

-- 
-- Carlos Puchol
-- cpg@cs.utexas.edu		CS Department, UT Austin
From: arras@fluke.icase.edu (Michael Arras)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: RFD: ?.?.FUZZY name poll [repost]
Date: 22 Nov 1992 17:03:46 GMT
Organization: ICASE/NASA Langley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: fluke.icase.edu

	There has been some debate about what to call the new fuzzy
newsgroup.  I have decided to take a poll.  Please mail me at:

	arras@forwiss.uni-erlangen.de

stating whether you like the name comp.ai.fuzzy, or sci.logic.fuzzy.
After this is settled, the CFV will be posted.  Thank you.

Michael Arras                      Bavarian Research Center
arras@forwiss.uni-erlangen.de      for Knowledge-Based
Artificial Neural Network and      Systems_________________
Fuzzy Logic Research Group         FORWISS   ERLANGEN * MUNICH * PASSAU
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom)
Subject: Proposed Guidelines Changes (was Re: Give up, Dave, you've lost!)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 21:49:05 GMT
Organization: IBM Research

In article <1ei1arINNg3t@talon.UCS.ORST.EDU>, stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov15.223126.16981@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:
|> >I have proposed changes to the Guidelines to avoid a recurrence of
|> >what I think were legitimate problems with this vote.
|> >
|> >In case these proposals were lost in the flamage, I restate them:
|> >
|> >1. Avoid bundling multiple unrelated votes onto a single ballot.  
|> 
|> The creation of a hierarchy of groups is bundling related groups, by
|> definition. If they were unrelated, they would not be going into the
|> same hierarchy.
|> 

We've covered this ground in previous postings.  The proposal
to create a hierarchy of groups only means that the proposer
*thinks* the groups are related.  It doesn't mean that "by definition"
they *are* related.  Only if the ballot is fairly disseminated
and the vote passes, can we conclude that by net-consensus the
groups are related.  That's why I want a *syntactic* criterion
for what the subject line should say and what votes may be
bundled:  so that 'yes' voters and 'no' voters alike would agree
that the ballot was properly formed and labelled.

|> >2. The ballot should name all affected newsgroups in the subject line.
|> >   Assuming (1) is enforced as above, the subject line should not be overlong.
|> 
|> This violates the "guidelines" you quoted earlier which demand that
|> articles have only 40 character subject lines. 
|> 
|> Call For Votes: renaming rec.music.synth to rec.music.makers.synth
|> 
|> I didn't count it, but it sure looks like more than 40 characters. I
|> could have used a more explicit subject line, but that would have been
|> even longer.

CFV: renaming rec.music.synth

The above is adequate, brief (29 characters), and meets my guideline.
There is no need to mention the new name, since at the
time of the vote no such group as rec.music.makers.synth exists.
The subject line has the effect of telling readers of rec.music.synth
that there is a vote to change the name of the group they read.

|> 
|> >3. If (1) is not enforced as above, then post separate announcements
|> >   with Subject lines explicitly naming the affected groups to the affected groups.
|> 
|> Anyone who wishes to do so is already free to perform step 3. As another
|> poster stated, if there is interest in a vote, someone will post. If
|> not, then step 3 is a waste of bandwidth.

I don't care about bandwidth.  I don't believe bandwidth has ever
been an issue.  The bandwidth already spent on fallout from
the rec.music.synth argument is greater than the overhead of
performing step (3) automatically on the next 500 or so votes.


-- 
Rob Strom, strom@watson.ibm.com, (914) 784-7641
IBM Research, 30 Saw Mill River Road, P.O. Box 704, Yorktown Heights, NY  10598
From: adc@tardis.cl.msu.edu (Alan D. Cabrera)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Date: 22 Nov 92 15:18:57 GMT
Reply-To: adc@tardis.cl.msu.edu
Organization: Michigan State University

In article 1e9uc5INNgn3@agate.berkeley.edu, tom@soda.berkeley.edu (Tom Holub) writes:
>
>I don't have a copy of the Usenet group creation guidelines with me,
>but they are quite explicit on this point; discussion belongs in
>news.groups, not in the affected newsgroup.  A RFD should be posted
>to all interested groups with followups set to news.groups.  This
>is to allow people who aren't interested in the discussion to ignore
>it, and to force people to work harder to get a successful CFV; the
>newsgroup creation process is intended to make it as difficult as
>possible to create new groups.
>
>In short, Alan's procedures are by the book, except perhaps for 
>his self-nomination for moderator.  The idea still rots, however.

Gee Tom, you've kindof put me into a catch-22 situation.  First you
advocate, no direct, me to post an RFD and further stipulate that ALL
discussion takes place on news.groups.  With that in mind, where was I
supposed to begin a discussion as to who would like to be a moderator?

Or maybe the interpretation of an RFD could be that it is just a 
proposal, subject to modification.  So it really doesn't matter
who originally gets nominated for moderator.

Which is it Tom?  In any case your point about my self-nomination for
moderator is moot.


---
Alan Cabrera				internet:  adc@tardis.cl.msu.edu
Computer Laboratory			phone:     (517) 353-3027
Michigan State University		fax:       (517) 353-9847
514 Computer Center			bitnet:    CABRERA@MSU
East Lansing, MI 48824
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: akerson@deimos.af.mil (Pete Akerson - akerson%srg@uunet.uucp)
Subject: kill file for Ahmadiyya ahmadiyya
Organization: Arinc Research Corp.
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 21:32:34 GMT



/Ahmadiyya/h:j
/ahmadiyya/h:j


I feel sooo much better now !
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.flame,talk.bizarre,news.admin.policy,rec.music.synth,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.humor
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.solid-state.electronics
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff & Nonsense Division
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:37:47 GMT

In article <sehari.721899018@class1.iastate.edu> sehari@iastate.edu (Babak Sehari) writes:

>Frankly, who cares about the name?!

Sigh.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: This whole "Ignorance is enforced" r.m-m reorg argument
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
	<1992Nov6.183921.22459@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
	<1992Nov12.205151.25394@cbnewsc.cb.att.com>
	<1992Nov18.104410.20730@abekrd.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:14:29 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.104410.20730@abekrd.co.uk> graeme@abekrd.co.uk (Graeme Griffiths) writes:

	   It would appear that Dave Heyes (amongst others, I'm not picking on
   you Dave I just remember your name) argues that [...]

Sure you do.  It's spelled "Hayes."  :)
-- 
Ed McGuire                   1603 LBJ Freeway, Suite 780
Systems Administrator/       Dallas, Texas 75234
 Member of Technical Staff   214/620-2100, FAX 214/484-8110
Intellection, Inc.           <ed@intellection.com>
From: tsang@cs.washington.edu (Donald Tsang)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD rec.games.netrpg
Date: 19 Nov 92 09:28:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: beaver.1992Nov19.092841.24597
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Nov19.021628.18155@alf.uib.no> magnus@ii.uib.no writes:
>Proposed newsgroup name: rec.games.netrpg
>Status: unmoderated
>Charter: rec.games.netrpg is for discussion of design, implementation
>and use of the net.rpg game.
>
>Rationale: The net.rpg game is a role-playing game being created by a
>number of people on rec.games.design. However, some people have
>complained that we are filling the newsgroup with messages which are
>not of interest to all readers.
>
>The net.rpg posts constitute a pretty large volume [40+ messages/day]

How many people participate, and how many non-participants are
interested in the interim versions?  If the answer to either of those
questions is "very few", perhaps the entire thing should be moved
to a mailing list to save bandwidth.

If it were made into a mailing list, major interim versions could be
periodically posted to appropriate groups (rec.games.design, and
rec.games.frp.archives) for playtest and comment.  New users could
be culled that way, too.

-- 
Donald Tsang                    "Ho!  Haha!  Guard!  Turn!  Parry!  Dodge!
tsang@june.cs.washington.edu     Spin!  Ha!  Thrust!"
..!uw-beaver!june!tsang                       -- Robin Hood Daffy
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: CFV? What's a CFV??
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 03:37:40 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to patrick@convex.COM (Patrick F. McGehearty):
>Perhaps [...] the large numbers of new users who do read these things
>don't make as many mistakes when posting, so they do not come to your
>attention?

This point deserves repetition.  By definition, those who do read and
digest the n.a.newusers documents get along rather well, so we never
notice them... it's only those who don't learn first that stick out.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
                 just another elitist Usenet administrator
From: ivory@e7sa.crd.ge.com (John Ivory)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.adoption
Keywords: adoption
Date: 20 Nov 92 12:51:27 GMT
Organization: Tower Concepts

I believed for some time that there was great need for this newsgroup.
So much so that I began the official, formal mechanism for requesting such
a group.  My posting(s) to the newgroups news group yielded basically
the following information...

* The vast majority of people couldn't give a hoot.  Although the people
reading this now view adoption as an incredibly important topic, that
is not reflected any significant number of net people.

* Many comments came back suggesting that those interested in this topic
could just post to misc.kids and get a conversation going there.  I'm not
sure that's a workable idea.  Many people trying to adopt are infertile,
and find it uncomfortable to mill around in the conversation place of those
who already have kids.

* There's already an e-mail group for adoption, and many felt that that
should suffice.  I joined that group for a while and was basically disappointed.
The dialogs were mostly monologues.  The bulk of the traffic dealt with
people who had already completed the adoption process.  Each would chronicle
their ordeal, but there would be very little flow beyond that.  There
were a lot of nice people on there, but very little extended interaction.
The group was small in number (~25 or so?), but that could be due to
lack of knowledge of its existance.

I still believe that the net is an excellent vehicle for interaction
between people on this topic.  I'm not confident that you'll get enough
votes to have it become a full fledged 'real' news group.  I could
be wrong though.  To make it happen, everybody reading this should begin
subscribing to the newgroups newsgroup and have dialog about the viability
of this group cross posted there.  Cross posting to misc.kids wouldn't
hurt either.

The whole adoption process is amazing, frustrating, costly, emotional,
frenzied, etc, etc.  Acting as a group, however loosely, perhaps we can
change some of that.

Yeah, lets get some dialog going here!
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: qvortrup@inf.ethz.ch (Michael Qvortrup)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy
Keywords: fantasy RFD arts
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 07:59:00 GMT

In article <pvanheus.722108122@frodo> pvanheus@frodo.cs.uct.ac.za (P A van Heusden) writes:
>[...]
>2) Rec.arts.fantasy gains largely by being more visibly fantasy orientated
>tahn rec.arts.sf.*. I have been on the net for a while, yet no one in the
>groups I read pointed me towards the .sf hierarchy when I was looking
>for fantasy discussion, (I looked in groups such as alt.mythology) and I
>had skipped the .sf stuff, as I am not a science fiction fan. (I find it
>hard to call eg. Tolkien science fiction, however hard you try.) So,
>by making a rec.arts.fantasy group, users can look at the group listing
>and easily see where to go. Its up to you if this merits a new group, of
>course. If you do not wish to have a new group, (I'm also backing off the
>idea given people's response.) how about change of name from rec.arts.sf.*
>to rec.arts.spec_fic.* or something more explicit?

A renaming of rec.arts.sf.* to rec.arts.spec-fic.* would fit your purpose
better. It is also a lot more realistic than trying to define a hard
boundary between science fiction and fantasy. 

Several people have pointed out, that it is difficult for new people to
find a fantasy related newsgroup based on a name search. I guess that it
really is a bit of an 'in thing' that sf in our context is speculative
fiction and not science fiction. This leads to think that there might be
a valid point here. The question then is, do we want to go through the
whole precedure once again? On the other hand, it is already a year since
we changed the *.sf.* hierarchy last time :-), and the damage last time wasn't
that big :-(.

In summary:

	1) I'll fight hand and claw (and sword and sorcery and beamgun ..)
	   any and all attempts to create a new newsgroup for fantasy
	   alone - based on my conviction, that a reasonable dividing line
	   *cannot* be found.

	2) If more people find, that *.sf.* is too obscure, and a more
	   explicit name might be a Good thing (TM), and a consensus can
	   be reached on the new name (I personally like *.spec-fic.*),
	   then I might support such a renaming.

Greetings,
--Mike

-- 
#include <std-disclm.h>--"... and there is a small flaw in my character."---
Real Life: Michael Christian Heide Qvortrup      A Dane         ETH, Zuerich
e-mail   : qvortrup@inf.ethz.ch                  abroad         Switzerland
Institut fuer wissenschaftliches Rechnen  /  Inst. of Scientific Computation
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.bangladesh
From: rana@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (Nabeel Ahmad Rana)
Subject: Re: CFV: soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya moderated
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 05:11:55 GMT

srinivas@vision.crd.ge.com (Chukka Srinivas) writes:

>In article <BxuJAr.85A@ucunix.san.uc.edu> bhatnagr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Raj Bhatnagar) writes:
>>  [.....deleted...]
>>
>>PS: Some of these fanatics think that they are still in Pakistan or in 
>                   ^^^^^^^^
>>some other religious islamic state and can continue with the religious 
>>persecution that is carried out back home in their countries. Yes sir,
>>objecting to Ahmadis from calling themselves Muslims is religious
>>persecution. I wish "Religious Tolerance 101" with a grade of B or above 
>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>is made a pre-requisite for graduation in every university for people from 
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>these countries.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>---raj


>Maybe people, especially religious fanatics of ALL shades
>and of ALL religions, even from our own country should be asked
>to take this course.
>I do not know about Pakistan. But, that would really help India.

>>

>-srinivas.


You both Mr. Srinivas and Mr. Bhatnagar are very right, that such
a course should be offered to all such people. But I don't think 
that would even make a difference. The way these people a brought
up, religous ill-tolerance is jammed into their brains. Their minds
are closed to accept other beliefs.

Sincerely,


-- 
Nabeel A. Rana
rana@rintintin.colorado.edu
LOVE FOR ALL : HATRED FOR NONE.
________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Andrew Hackard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: To keep the r.m.s rename is _not_ elitist (was Re: *BAD*...)
Date: 16 Nov 92 01:13:36 GMT
     <1dn1n0INNdd9@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> 
     <1992Nov10.221402.26290@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller) writes:

>The spirit of the guidelines suggests that people's preferences
>are valid. Whether or not people expressed those preferences in the right
>way is not relavent. 

Not according to the guidelines you just quoted.  I can scream all I want
in the computer lab about how bad a vote is, but if I don't vote myself,
I have absolutely NO right to complain.  If a user doesn't express his or
her preference in the right way -- by voting -- then there's no basis for
complaint later.

>The CFV was unclear. To me, the vote is invalid.

The CFV was (based on what I saw, after the fact) not as concise as it
could have been, but it seemed perfectly clear.  The first sf-lovers
ballot...now THAT was unclear.  :-)  In any event, vote-takers are
entirely within their rights to explain how the ballot is formatted to
anyone who asks, and lack of clarity isn't enough cause to invalidate the
vote.

>>If a revote somehow comes about, I will vote FOR the new group even
>>though I voted against the renaming the first time. 
>
>Thanks for your support. Just let everyone else tell you what is right,
>and you'll be a fine cadre member. 

Sheesh, someone grab Bill Overpeck out of talk.abortion and tell him
we've got a paranoiac on our hands for sure.

--
--Andrew Hackard                                 If I spoke for UT, this post
  andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu                        would make even less sense.
From: hill@norman.VI.RI.CMU.EDU (Robert Hill)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Date: 23 Nov 92 11:24:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.By62CA.6vG.2
Reply-To: hill@norman.vi.ri.cmu.edu
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

Tom Holub writes
> )Yep..I guess they are.  I don't have to agree with them.  The question 
> )is  
> ): does following proper procedure help or hurt most readers of  
> )rec.games.netrek?  I'll let you figure it out...
> 
> I think it helps.  I think there is a large subset of the r.g.n 
> population
> that has no interest in this discussion, and that moving it to
> news.groups lets those people read about netrek, which is what they
> wanted to do when they subscribed.  I think most groups have a large
> subset of people who have no interest in discussions about group
> splits, which is why discussions about group splits belong in
> news.groups.

Do you think more readers of r.g.n. would want to know about it or not?  I  
think that a much lager subset of r.g.n. readers would like to know.   
Besides, its not like we are talking alot of posts here.  Its just  
pointless to sift through 100 news.groups messages everyday.

> There is a large and boring flame war going on on this topic right 
> now, get in on that if you think the guidelines are wrong.
>  -Tom

I do...but i'm unsubscribing to news.groups today.  I have no desire to  
sit and read this stuff.

Rob