HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tale@ten.uu.net (David C Lawrence)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.archives.msdos.announce moderated and comp.archives.msdos.d
	<BvtDAu.3uF@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Organization: UUNET Technologies, Inc.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 01:19:20 GMT

I posted my objections to comp.archives.msdos.d and this was a followup:

In <BvtDAu.3uF@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell):

> I can state my reasons for not placing the announcements in those groups:

Larry proceeded to rebutt by stating several times that none of the
groups were suitable in directing users to upload announcements.

For anyone else unclear on the concept, my objections are _not_
to comp.archives.msdos.announce.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: Create a killfile? AAAAAAAARGH!
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 13:28:19 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to jfurr@vtssi.vt.EDU (Joel Furr):
>As anyone with a little sense would realize, SOME PEOPLE CANNOT
>CREATE KILLFILES.

Quite.

However, Joel, you've missed the point entirely.

If you want to participate in Usenet without having KILL files, fine!
More power to you.  But DON'T COMPLAIN TO US ABOUT YOUR CHOICE.  You
_chose_ to drive without windshield wipers; if that choice has
repercussions -- i.e. you can't see when it rains -- well, that's
_your_ responsibility, now, isn't it?

It never rains, but it pours.  And Usenet waits for no sentient being.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
    "My favorite phenomenon is when someone mails me or posts to this
     group, either calling me a newbie or telling me that my postings
     are not relevant to alt.non.sequitur."           -- Matt Welsh
From: uli@cats.muh.dec.com (OOOO-OpenObjectOrientedOgre)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.windows reorganization
Date: 15 Oct 92 15:19:06 GMT
Reply-To: uw@decum.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment   Munich   Germany


From .../X11R5/mit/man/X.man  (on a X11R5 system type "man X<ret>":

X - a portable, network-transparent window system

The X Consortium requests that the following names be used when
referring to this software:

X
X Window System
X Version 11
X Window System, Version 11
X11

"X Window System" is a trademark of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

So, why not simply moving the "comp.windows..." tree to	"comp.X.[a-z]*..."?
Or is X12 just around the corner ?	;^))	Then to "comp.X11.[a-z]*..."

	uli
--
OpenObjectOrientedOgre
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Re: QUESTION!  Is there a group discussing terrorists ?
Organization: NDA
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 08:52:32 GMT

In article <26827@castle.ed.ac.uk> woody@castle.ed.ac.uk (I Woodrow) writes:
>YES, just that.  Is there a newsgroup or list discussing terrorists and     
>terrorism ?  NO I'm not looking for hints and tips.   :-)

Not specifically, but you could try the following newsgroups:
 sci.military (moderated)
 soc.culture.latin-america (and other regional/national groups)
 alt.society.anarchy
 misc.activism.progressive (moderated; news items rather than discussion)
 alt.activism
 alt.activism.d


--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lib1p@rosie.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.marching
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 12:59:00 GMT

Anybody who believes that marching is not an art form either has 
never marched, marched so long that its second nature, or has 
forgotten how difficult it was in your early days of learning to
march and play at the same time while staying in step and in line
and making that curve look just right before going on to that
yardline..........


Have I made my point?

-=>Tammy Stark Blandino<=-

lib1p@jetson.uh.edu

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.386bsd
Organization: Theoretical Physics, Lund University, Sweden
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 13:57:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.094015.2943@aber.ac.uk> ccs@aber.ac.uk (Christopher "Jd" Samuel) writes:
>In article <BvpwHF.Gy0@uunet.uu.net>
>   pauls@umich.edu (Paul Southworth) doodled:
>
>> PROPOSAL:
>> 
>> Here's a proposal for an UNMODERATED group in comp.os.* dedicated
>> to the 386bsd operating system developed by Bill and Lynne Jolitz.
>> 
>> The current situation with 386bsd meshed into comp.unix.bsd is
>> overloaded and confusing.  There is a great deal of traffic dedicated
>> to 386bsd, mixed in with unrelated discussion of other BSD systems,
>> including other commercial BSD systems aimed at the i386 platform, which
>> is especially confusing to new users who are unable to distinguish
>> easily between BSD/386 and 386bsd.  This needs to end.
>[stuff deleted]
>
>Why not place it under comp.unix.bsd, or just under comp.unix ?
>ie
>comp.unix.bsd.386bsd
>comp.unix.bsd


I think it should _definitely_ be somewhere in the comp.unix hierarchy,
and _not_ under comp.os. 

In fact, although I'd vote for comp.unix.386bsd, or comp
unix.bsd.386bsd, I'd probably vote against comp.os.386bsd.
Usenet is confusing enough even if we keep to the hierarchies.
Breaking the hierarchical system will only make things worse.

Magnus Olsson                   | \e+      /_
Dept. of Theoretical Physics    |  \  Z   / q
University of Lund, Sweden      |   >----<           
Internet: magnus@thep.lu.se     |  /      \===== g
Bitnet: THEPMO@SELDC52          | /e-      \q
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: fuzzy@netcom.com (Fuzzy Fox)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.archives.msdos.announce moderated and comp.archives.msdos.d
Organization: Foxes 'R' Us - Seven locations to serve you
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 18:27:15 GMT

brown@NCoast.ORG (Stan Brown) writes:

>No, because it would _not_ carry the incessant metadiscussions that
>we've seen for years in cbip.archives.  I'm for anything that will
>obviate the incessant posted artiucles about off-charter posted
>articles.

If there is no newsgroup (i.e. no c.a.m.d), then there will not be any off-
charter postings.

The proposed c.a.m.d newsgroup is not moderated.  How do you figure that
people will not post their incessant discussions?  I am quite convinced
that if created, c.a.m.d will go the exact same path as c.b.i.p.d and
c.b.i.p.a.

-- 
#ifdef TRUE         | Fuzzy Fox                  fuzzy@netcom.com
#define  TRUE   0   | a.k.a. David DeSimone      an207@cleveland.freenet.edu
#define  FALSE  1   |   "Verily, thou art indeed a fool."   -- Chuckles the
#endif              |         Jester, moments before his untimely death.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.mecha
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 10:22:53 GMT

In article <439@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>Wouldn't these fit under the existing frp topic?

    ][ don't believe that the existing rec.games.frp.* and
 rec.games.board.* groups are adequate for all of these
 discussions, and that's why I wrote up and posted the RFD.
 

>The problem w/ battletech (& the other mecha games) was that 
>they weren't (quite) role playing, they weren't (quite) board
>games, they weren't (quite) wargames.....
>
>Not to mention that we also are including the other types of
>games (mainly computer-based) that also are related.
>
>I'd say the ninja-high school discussion could fit quite
>well under frp because it is still basically an frp, regardless
>of what it was based upon....

    ][ agree.
 

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
From: Kay.Shapero@f524.n102.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: use a KILLFILE
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Oct  1 1992
Date: 08 Oct 92  23:09:00

On <Oct 08 08:49>, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya) wrote to All:

 EN>windsurfing in a Unix group.... ;^)  I endorse moderation for 
 EN>certain
 EN>news groups more often.  I think as the net gains respect in the 
 EN>rest of
 EN>the world and professional societies and agencies pay to sustain 
 EN>moderators
 EN>and their moderating (like editing) that's ONE way to go.  But 
 EN>there should
 EN>always be some open-forum free speech groups like the talk 
 EN>groups, like alt,
 EN>like sci.topic.d, etc.

It might also be useful to consider a middle course, similar to the
approach taken in FIDOnet, whereby someone (termed the "moderator" -
the word is NOT used in the same sense as in Usenet) is responsible for
posting whatever echo (newsgroup) rules there may be and informing folks
when they go off track.  This individual does NOT prescreen postings on
the group like a usenet moderator, but just having one person as
"Designated Topic Cop" as it were does seem to help prevent the case
where one set of off topic posts generates myriads of "That's Not On
Topic" posts.  It can also cut down on the flame wars (should this be
desirable).  This without having to go to the trouble of generating
moderated groups for things that don't really need moderation as per
your examples.

For what it's worth, the FIDO echo that I "moderate", filk has been 
gated into the alt structure as alt.music.filk for some time now, and
despite the lack of any serious method of enforcement of the rules, I've
found that the users tend to be most courteous, even if I have to call
them on an off topic thread on occasion.  

--- msged 2.06
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lwv26@cas.org (Larry W. Virden)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.windows reorganization
Followup-To: news.groups
Reply-To: lvirden@cas.org (Larry W. Virden)
Organization: Nedriv Software and Shoe Shiners, Uninc.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 11:23:47 GMT

In article <430@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
:In article <1992Oct12.213136.5794@ais.com> bruce@ais.com (Bruce C. Wright) writes:
:>In article <id.ON0U.JI8@ferranti.com>, peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:
:>> In article <1992Oct9.224905.5776@ais.com> bruce@ais.com (Bruce C. Wright) writes:
:>>> Unfortunately moving things like X to a .gui hierarchy is _also_ going
:>>> to cause problems for those new (and clueless) people looking for
:>>> information on X.
:>> 
:>> comp.gui.x-windows.*?
:>
:
:I think that using "x-windows" would be a BIG help in indicating
:that this is NOT any other kind of windows (ms-windows in particular).
:
:I think it is also important to consider that many ms-windows
:users do NOT think of it as "microsoft windows", but just "windows"
:due to the environment they generally come from.
:
:otoh, x-windows users almost ALWAYS think of it as "x-windows".
:


Note that the entity supported by the MIT X Consortium is only to be called
'The X Window System' or X (or sometimes X11, when referring to a specific
version).  'X Windows' refers to something totally different than the
current comp.windows.x topics from what I understand - it is a product
by some vendor which may not even talk to X servers and clients for all I
know.

-- 
Larry W. Virden                 UUCP: osu-cis!chemabs!lvirden
Same Mbox: BITNET: lvirden@cas  INET: lvirden@cas.org
Personal: 674 Falls Place,   Reynoldsburg, OH 43068-1614
America Online: lvirden@aol.com
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: Create a killfile? AAAAAAAARGH!
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 13:41:36 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to nrp@csug.cs.reading.ac.uk:
>Remember also that outside the US it can be difficult to find a Unix BBS.
>This is a global network.

You've got cause-and-effect backwards.

Usenet need not adjust its nature to non-U.S. conditions.

Usenet is global because it already fits non-U.S. conditions.

To the extent that Usenet fails to fit those conditions, it will
become less global.  To which I say: C'est la vie.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
   "I am truly as big a genius as all other Rush fans." -- Bruce Bufalini
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.games.mecha (was: Re: RFD: rec.games.frp.board)
Date: 14 Oct 92 07:29:29 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu

Chris Meadows writes:
>Also, there is at least one other genre-related game group that does
>not come under the header of rec.games.frp.*.  This group is           
>rec.games.cyber.  

There is talk of moving that back under r.g.f, but it was short-lived
and long ago.  Then again, it was put forth by the moderator, so I'd
give it more weight than a spouting-off.  Yes, moderator.  R.g.cyber
is moderated, and there was also talk about changing that as well,
but that's not relevant to this discussion.

Just don't have this group be moderated, okay?

>I saw a game based on Robert Heinlein's STARSHIP TROOPERS 

If it's a re-release of an old Avalon Hill (? dunno, I've not played it
in years) game, it's a tactical game, rather than an RPG.  It's more
rec.games.board material IMPO.  Nothing to do re: mecha there, it's all
counters and attack strengths and the like.

>Many other games have elements of mecha in them.       

No shortage of them.  The only shortage is games that adequately address
a person's wishes re: mecha game.  Battletech is too unrealistic for some
(read r.g.board and see) and too clunky and slow for the likes of me.
Mekton is too anime for some (the ones who like Battletech), and Robo-
tech is ....

Ooops, I'm already writing an article for rec.games.mecha.  Let's get
the blasted thing ratified already!  =) 

Late night, caffiene and the net.  Not just a bad idea, it's the law.

-- 
Putt's Law:
	Technology is dominated by two types of people:
		Those who understand what they do not manage.
		Those who manage what they do not understand.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: mmead@nyx.cs.du.edu (Matt Mead)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.mud.logs moderated and rec.games.mud.logs.d
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 92 02:56:41 GMT


   Well, I think that it is a bad idea and will probably prompt more
tinyspying and unlawful, unconsented log posting.  I'm voting Nay on this
one.







Matt

Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.config
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: Re: use a KILLFILE
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 16:49:36 GMT

In article <2AD43686.457B@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>According to emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti):
>>Monthly postings are a form of "coercion".
>
>Ed, you're quite clever; I greatly enjoy your alternative WIU article
>as a result.  As such, you should know better than what's written
>above, and I'm disappointed that you don't.

Well, no, actually he is right.  FAQs (for instance, and I should know)
are a bit coercive, but then so are roads ("drive here").  So are charters,
so are Constitutions.  So is language.

On another note: Right, charters haven't helped and where is this nude
windsurfing in a Unix group.... ;^)  I endorse moderation for certain
news groups more often.  I think as the net gains respect in the rest of
the world and professional societies and agencies pay to sustain moderators
and their moderating (like editing) that's ONE way to go.  But there should
always be some open-forum free speech groups like the talk groups, like alt,
like sci.topic.d, etc.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Acting Associate Editor, Software and Publication Reviews
  Scientific Programming
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Seeking Books to buy:	Bongard, Pattern Recognition
			Imhof, Cartographic Relief Presentation
			Books on or by Benjamin Whorf
From: fath1@husc10.harvard.edu (Michael Fath)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.arts.marching
Date: 9 Oct 92 15:00:51 GMT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

I think that is fine.  Our goal now is to get out the VOTE!  We need 
100 more yes votes than no votes to get the groups formed.  So keep your
eyes posted for the CFV and get your friends who want to see bands, colorguard,
and drumcorps on ReadNews out to vote!!



-- 
MM   MM FFFFF 	Michael Fath		fath1@husc.harvard.edu
M M M M F	Dept of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics
M  M  M FFF     Harvard Medical School         
M     M F       Boston, MA 02115				**Enjoy life!
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.windows reorganization
Date: 13 Oct 92 18:14:36 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <1992Oct12.213136.5794@ais.com> bruce@ais.com (Bruce C. Wright) writes:
>In article <id.ON0U.JI8@ferranti.com>, peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:
>> In article <1992Oct9.224905.5776@ais.com> bruce@ais.com (Bruce C. Wright) writes:
>>> Unfortunately moving things like X to a .gui hierarchy is _also_ going
>>> to cause problems for those new (and clueless) people looking for
>>> information on X.
>> 
>> comp.gui.x-windows.*?
>
>I think as long as you have the string "window" in the group name,
>you are going to have clueless MS-Windows people stumble onto the
>group;  and just because there are so many of them, they could

I think your statement is right w/ a slight modification:
	... as long as you have the _unadorned_ string "window" ...

I think that using "x-windows" would be a BIG help in indicating
that this is NOT any other kind of windows (ms-windows in particular).

I think it is also important to consider that many ms-windows
users do NOT think of it as "microsoft windows", but just "windows"
due to the environment they generally come from.

otoh, x-windows users almost ALWAYS think of it as "x-windows".

we should in our reorg consider common usage and name groups
appropriately to increase the chances that joe user out there
will hit the proper group on the first try.

if both are under one tree (so they show up NEAR each other
when people are scanning the group list) it should be easy
enough to see

	...
	comp.gui.windows
	comp.gui.x-windows
	...

and pick the proper one.  I think part of the problem was the
LAST reorg that moved ms-windows way over to comp.os, and
INCREASED the confusion level of people looking to post
for ms-windows because the alternatives were not listed
anywhere near each other.

Your mileage may vary.


		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast!"
From: jonesm@nic.cerf.net (Matthew Jones)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.crafts.metalworking
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:29:28 GMT
Organization: CERFnet

In article <1992Oct14.154041.262@news.uwyo.edu> jimkirk@news.uwyo.edu writes:
>I would like to propose a change of name for the proposed newsgroup
>rec.crafts.metalworking, to simply rec.metalworking.  Apparently,
>UseNet is attempting to place more structure on the hierarchy, so that
>instead of rec.*, you have rec.group.*.  I question whether this
>is necessary, and/or whether implementation demands that existing
>groups be forcefully changed to meet the new guidelines rather than
>all being grandfathered.
>

[ Stuff deleted ]

>
>4.  In e-mail, some have complained to me that "crafts" is a demeaning
>    add-on, implying the group is for discussion of things like how to
>    weld five beer cans together into the shape of a schnauzer, and the
>    like.  Metalworking is considered (by those I have corresponded with)
>    a technical art, a profession, and/or a high skill.  Handwork is
>    craft, machine work is not.

[ rest of stuff deleted ]

I agree that crafts is not really appropriate for metalworking. If
the news gods want a subgroup. I would think "industrial-arts" would
be better, but only if woodworking was also forced to go along.

This has a nice appeal to me

rec.industrial-arts.metalworking
rec.industrial-arts.woodworking

One thing about the name rec.crafts.metalworking is that to me it implys
soldering and jewelerymaking which we NEVER discuss, NEVER really!

I would be happier if metalworking were in rec.models for example than
rec.crafts.

Ofcourse "rec.hobbies.*". But doesn't the rec of recreation so of imply
hobby?

But getting metalworking regular group status should be the issue,
lets not get hung up on the name.

Matthew Jones
jonesm@cerf.net
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: iba@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Wayne Iba)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.crafts.metalworking
Organization: NASA/ARC Information Sciences Division
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 20:32:26 GMT

Jim Kirkpatrick <JIMKIRK@corral.uwyo.edu> writes:

>  welding, whether by gas, arc, mig, tig, thermite, or other methods;


I would suggest modifying the charter to 

Metal joining, whether welding, brazing, soldering, riveting,
screwing, folding, etc.

--wayne (iba@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov)
From: pae@teal.csn.org (Phil Earnhardt)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Second RFD: rec.arts.marching.drumcorps & rec.arts.marching.misc
Date: 14 Oct 92 19:10:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: csn.Bw4L96.D05
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.

In article <Bw474L.1I2@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) writes:
>pae@teal.csn.org (Phil Earnhardt) wrote:
>> gordons@CS.ColoState.EDU (vahl scott gordon) writes:
>>> Of course marching in drum corps, bands, color guard, etc. is art.
>> There have been several postings this past week, and I can't tell if
>> they are for or against the gropus, as proposed. I suggest we try to
>> limit our discussion to this issue.
>> As it stands now, I have recorded no objection to the second RFD. If anyone
>> does have an issue, now is the time to speak.
>
>The stuff mentioned here is entirely confined to the USA, so unless you
>intend to include Scottish-style pipe bands, Maori haka, Bavarian oompah
>and English girls' kazoo bands in your remit, the group should go under the
>"usa" hierarchy (assuming that now exists), and not under a hierarchy like
>"rec" which will default to world distribution.

While the most active center of Drum & Bugle Corps activity is in the US,
there are also Drum Corps in Canada, Europe, and Japan. The UK has active
Drum and Bugle Corps. Drum & Bugle Corps are indeed a world-wide activity.
This was discussed in the Second RFD.

The other organizations you mention would be welcome in
rec.arts.marching.misc, provided they are groups who bring motion to their
performances. Again, this was covered in the Second RFD.

Please let me know if this addresses your concerns.  If you need a copy of the
RFD, send me e-mail.

>  Jack Campin
>INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk

--phil
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.windows reorganization
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 15:46:31 GMT

In article <383@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
> How would changing "windows" to "windowing" help.  The MSWindows people 
> still need a place to post.

They've got it. comp.os.ms-windows/*. In fact they have several groups there.
-- 
Peter da Silva                                         `-_-'
Ferranti Intl. Ctls. Corp.                              'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012           "Heeft u vandaag al uw wolf geknuffeld?"
+1 713 274 5180                       "Tjener, denne ret er stadig levende."
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: MODEL UN NEWSGROUP
From: <F36SI@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Date: Saturday, 10 Oct 1992 21:49:45 EDT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

    I do hereby pledge my support to the proposed newsgroup :
             talk.politics.world-gov
    It's about time we started talking about things that affect
    all human beings.
                       Peace,
                             Matt
Newsgroups: news.groups