HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: conty@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Conty)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Some comments on this rec.arts.{whatever}.manga
Date: 10 Apr 92 18:07:02 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories

In article <axolotl.702893487@syzygy>, axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain Sinclair) writes:
> conty@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Conty) writes:
>  >If a rec.arts. newsgroup for manga is chosen, the logical choice would be
>  >rec.arts.comics.manga.  As I already mentioned, manga used to be discussed
>  >in rec.arts.comics before rec.arts.anime even existed, so the discussion
>  >on manga would, in fact, return to the original hierarchy where it existed.
> 
> ie.  "where it didn't belong in the first place".

You seem to have a reading comprehension problem.

In my original article, I proved that the term "comics" refers to
any sort of comic book, whether it comes from Asia, Europe, Africa, or the
USA.  I also proved that asian comics have been, are, and will be discussed
in rec.arts.comics.

Why aren't asian comics a subdivision of comics?
-- 
			    E n r i q u e  C o n t y
			      jester@ihlpl.att.com
		   Disclaimer:  You're not dealing with AT&T.
From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Geoff Bronner)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.arts.manga...etc.....
Date: 14 Apr 92 13:16:56 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Organization: Amos Tuck School

In <1992Apr10.175001.18620@wdl.loral.com> dcb@wdl1.wdl.loral.com (David C Blume) writes:

>Egads.  Please please please understand.  There will *never* be much
>crossover between rec.arts.comics and *.manga.  alt.manga was spawned
>from rec.arts.anime not rec.arts.comics.  People post about the  *content*
>of the medium.  The *content* relates more closely to rec.arts.anime.

The potential for lack of crossover in a hierarchy is a good thing. It
reduced crossposting and makes the whole hierarchy more efficient. If a
*.comics.manga group has NO crossposting to rec.arts.comics I think that
would make the whole group creation a success.

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU  -  Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business
_______________________________________________________________________________
     "Are you sure?"      |           "That's a lot of money for a head!"
 "Yeah.  Sure I'm sure."  |                        -The Ugly
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: kherron@ms.uky.edu (Kenneth Herron)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.sys.novell reorganization
    <1992Apr16.041506.27180@wheaton.wheaton.edu>
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 23:55:42 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
X-Bytes: 

>>Overall, I have no problems with the proposal. I would, however, like to see
>>the .2x and .3x groups named something a little clearer...how about .version2
>>and .version3?

>how about .286 & .386 or .v286 .v386 or .ver2x .ver3x or something to that
>effect.  .versionX is too verbose and says about as much as .2x & .3x.  i do
>think a slightly more verbose name is in order.

Having a name component start with digits is not a good idea.  Too much
danger of the news software mistaking the "2x" or "386" subdirectory
for an article.
-- 
Kenneth Herron                                       kherron@ms.uky.edu
University of Kentucky                                  +1 606 257 2975
Department of Mathematics
                                              Flame early, flame often.
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Thread crossover
Followup-To: news.groups,news.admin
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 07:32:34 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.055008.13157@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>Yeah, that's what I keep telling the gay community on the net...but
>they don't seem to agree. I figure that since they are "in it" more 
>than I am, they would know. More importantly, I'm giving them the
>benefit of the doubt...and trying to see if it is so or it isn't so.

Too bad nobody reacts this way to the manga fans....
--
This is a newer version of the memetic .signature infection.  Now that's an
idea.  Copy it into your .signature today!

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
From: wald@theory.lcs.mit.edu (David Wald)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga
Date: 8 Apr 92 16:21:00 GMT
Organization: Laboratory for Computer Science, MIT

In article <8APR199214543734@vms2.iscs.nus.sg>
limkiong@vms2.iscs.nus.sg (Twas brillig, and the slithy toves...) writes:
>In article <CKD.92Apr6161106@loiosh.eff.org>, ckd@eff.org
>(Christopher Davis) writes...
>>So push for rec.arts.comics => rec.arts.comics.misc.  It'll probably
>>happen sooner or later anyway.
>
>This is highly unlikely to happen. Do you know how many people read
>that group?  Can you imagine the screams that will echo throughout
>the net if this is proposed?

It's not so unlikely as all that.  The group is already in the throws
of a split discussion.  If any such split takes place, one of the
results will probably be a rec.arts.comics.misc.

-David
--
============================================================================
David Wald                                           wald@theory.lcs.mit.edu
   "Blessed are the peacocks, for they shall be called sonship of God"
             -- Matt 5:9, from a faulty QuickVerse 2.0
============================================================================
From: dave@compnect.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Info repost from news.groups
Keywords: Misleading information, coutesy of Alok..... again
Date: 6 Apr 92 22:07:58 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Compnect, Harrisburg, Pa.

In article <1992Apr3.202642.10144@cbnewsi.cb.att.com>, alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia) writes:
> In article <1992Apr3.183947.24610@nas.nasa.gov>, raghavan@wk21.nas.nasa.gov (Venkatraman Raghavan) writes:
> > Found this on news.groups
> > 
> > > From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades)
> > >     Actually, according to Greg Spafford's list of active newsgroups,
> > > soc.culture.indian.american doesn't and shouldn't exist.
> 
> Yes, it is not in official list.

HEY SPAFF! You're not 'Official'!!! <sheesh>

> > > It was taken
> > > off the list of valid newsgroups due to the questionable tactics used by
> > > Alok during the vote taking, and has been removed from a great many
> > > sites already. 
> 
> Originally it was taken off due to name problem and some threats of legal
> suit. The reason given now is the 'questional tactics'. I recognize that
> the voting process has been questioned by several of netters.

WINNER... Net Understatement Award

> However it is
> misleading to say that it has been removed from great many sites.
> As far as I know it has not been removed from any site at all.

Hmmm. I don't seem to see it in MY active file. Guess I removed it. 

> A few people had certainly threatened to do so. However from the postings 
> coming onto SCIA, it is evident that all the sites which have been contributing
> traffic on SCIA, are still contributing traffic on it.

Flawed logic. Present proof of your supposition please.

> The current discussion is being conducted because of some net.crusaders
> and die-hard SCIA enemies who have influenced the minds of Dave Lawrence
> and Gene Spafford who 'run' this USENET with the help of a group called
> 'group-advice' at RPI.

Uh-oh.... "Mind Control Surfaces On Usenet. Film at 11"

What's most disturbing about your outrageous statement is that I think you
really believe it. More's the pity. Who are you going to accuse next?
Wait! I see it coming now:

"Alok says President Bush and his wife are responsible. Death of Usenet
predicted" 

> Alok

aka 'Clueless'

--
 Dave Ratcliffe (SysAdmin)           The Data Factory BBS  Harrisburg  Pa. 
 dave@compnect.uucp                      (717)657-4997  (717)657-4992
 compnect!dave@uunet.UU.NET                       Login: tdf
 eds1!compnect!dave@psuvax1.uucp           3/12/24/9600 Telebit PEP
Newsgroups: news.groups,talk.religion.misc
From: gritton@alaska.caedm.byu.edu (Jamie Gritton)
Subject: Why soc.religion.mormon failed (was: why do we have no votes?)
Lines: 40
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 13:02:48 MDT
Organization: Brigham Young University, Provo UT USA
In-reply-to: hedrick@dumas.rutgers.edu's message of 13 Apr 92 06:34:19 GMT
Reply-To: gritton@byu.edu

hedrick@dumas.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes:

> I notice that soc.religion.mormon has failed.  I'm worried that this
> failure is an abuse of the voting process.  As I understand it, the
> purpose of voting is to make sure (1) that there is enough demand to
> justify a group and (2) that the way it is implemented is appropriate,
> e.g. whether it's moderated, what it's called, etc.  I'm concerned,
> based both on the discussion here and on seeing who cast some of the
> negative votes, that people voted against it because they dislike
> Mormon ideas.

I think two things killed the group. As Mr. Hedrick mentioned, there
were probably many who voted "no" because they don't like Mormons
(or at least don't like Mormonism). In my opinion, most of the opposition
came from the "no temple secrets" stand. The unresolved issue in the
news.groups discussion is that many felt they should be able to discuss
any topic, and many felt the tepmle matters should be left out at all
costs. This left a divisive "yes" vs "no" crowd, and it looks as if the
"no" side was bigger.

This is a sticky issue. The best atmosphere would be to have Mormons keep
quiet on what they feel they shouldn't discuss, and others can say what
they want, facing silence from the Mormons on temple details. The problem
is moderation. I feel the group should be moderated, but its a tough ethical
question for a Mormon moderator whether passing what someone else says
on a keep-quiet subject is tantamount to the Moderator saying it himself.
And the Mormons would never accept a non-Mormon moderator (nor should they).

The Mormons and non-Mormons just had incompatible goals for this group.
Most of the group's readership would have been Mormon, but all of Usenet
is mostly non-Mormon and is a bigger group, so they won. I think this is
a valid use of "no" votes, though I personally feel a straight majority
is a better indicator that a 2/3 majority.

I don't think there will be another attempt to create a Mormon newsgroup.
Those on the mailing lists generally thought the lists were sufficient, and
the mailing lists, as they need not be accepted by everyone, avoid the
above issue nicely.
--
James Gritton - gritton@byu.edu - I disclaim
Date:  9 Apr 92 02:19:59 GMT
From: axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain Sinclair)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga
Reply-To: axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney

scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) writes:
 >A few years back there was active manga discussion in rec.arts.comics.
 >When alt sprung up, the manga group there drew off most of the discussion.
 >My impression was that the manga folk left because they didn't want to
 >have to slog thru the non-manga topics, not that they were offended by
 >the association with comics.

This is pretty true.  It's just that there's almost no overlap, for
a lot of manga readers.

As others have said, there is oodles of manga traffic on rec.arts.anime,
(though it might not be recognisable as such, without close scrutiny).
My personal archive of manga translations pulled off the net is approaching
two Mb -- and that's just the fraction that I'm interested in.

In any event, association with (or dissociation from) comics is only
one reason why rec.arts.comics.misc is unworkable.


--
Iain Sinclair   axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au                             ne cede.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)
Subject: Re: No New Enya News Group!!
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 15:43:45 GMT

In <1992Apr8.211041.5634@resonex.com> michael@resonex.com (Michael Bryan) writes:
>If you don't want to receive the group, fine.  Even though I love
>Enya, I'll probably abstain from the voting, simply because I wouldn't
>have time to read it even if it existed.  However, if enough people
>are interested in the group, let it be created.

Perhaps you missed the flap over rec.music.phish.

Phish had an active mailing list.  I don't think the new group was a good
idea, but they did have enough people to override the nay-sayers.  However,
if we just sit by and let this Enya group pass (without a large mailing list,
even though there is already an alt group), we are sending a message even
worse than the Phish message.  The creation of rec.music.phish says "if you
have a large mailing list, you can override most objections to the bad idea
of creating a newsgroup for one artist".  The (hypothetical) creation of
rec.music.enya would say "if you want a group for one artist that you happen
to like, just do it".

Now, maybe you think it's a good idea to splinter rec.music into the
thousands of bands that it could possibly be, but such a splintering
would be useless to most people.  There would be almost no cross-pollination
of musical tastes.  One would have to explicitly subscribe to groups about
bands they were (or might be) interested in.

Despite the fact that people claim that the technology renders my argument
silly, in practical terms there are sites that would be unable to handle
an explosion of thousands more newsgroups, for several different reasons.

The whole idea of band/artist-based naming conventions is bad.

You might as well split up rec.autos into rec.autos.taurus, rec.autos.miata,
rec.autos.911 etc.
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
              My soul seemed as foul as smoke from burning cat fur
From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Geoff Bronner)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: SCIA (A violation of net guidelines)
Date: 7 Apr 92 13:31:25 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: Amos Tuck School

In <1992Apr6.203727.26072@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia) writes:

>An official RFD was posted for SCIA on October 19, 1991. This resulted in
>posting a CFV on November 19, 1991.

A vote that is considered to be invalid and doesn't count.

>The fact that this violation has been done with the consent of David
>Lawrence (Who too posted this new RFD on news.announce.newgroups)
>and group-advice members is even more disturbing. 

Encouraging is the word I would use. Since these are 'guidelines' and not
rules they are meant to handle day to day activity, not un-anticipated
vote manipulation. Your actions were not anticipated by the guidlines so
the people who recommend such things made an exception. I think it was a
good call. Why should all the people who wanted this group suffer because
of your irresponsibility?

>How can we be expected to follow guidelines in letter and spirit when the
>net.gods are violating it ?

How can we be expected to follow guidlines if they let people like you get
away with gross violations of that spirit? Why don't you buy a clue and
just bow out of this whole issue?

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU  -  Computing Support Technician, Tuck School of Business
	"Of course not all chemicals are bad. Without chemicals such as
	 hydrogen and oxygen, for example, there would be no way to make water,
	 a vital ingredient in beer." -- Dave Barry
Date:  7 Apr 92 02:30:35 GMT
From: axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain Sinclair)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga
Reply-To: axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney

hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades) writes:
 >    No one is trying to make manga a sub-set of comics, or even
 >subordinate to western comics. Please try and keep to the subject of the
 >debate. 

The subject of the debate is why rec.arts.comics.manga is inappropriate.

One of the reasons why it's inappropriate is because the name very
clearly implies that "manga goes under comics", which is very clearly
wrong, as far as the people who will be using the newsgroup are concerned.


 >    If you are talking about the new user, then s/he will probably try
 >to first understand the hierarchies. And many might not even know what
 >manga is.

Do you think that new users will know what rec.arts.wobegon,
rec.arts.music.gaffa, or rec.org.sca is for?   Red herring.


 >    Until you can show why this group shouldn't be part of the
 >rec.arts.comics.* hierarchy, I don't think it will pass.

We already have, repeatedly.   If it fails, BTW, I'll be crossposting
all my alt.manga posts (incl. long translations and synopses) into
rec.arts.comics, to increase propagation.  I mean, manga are just comics,
right?


--
Iain Sinclair   axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au                             ne cede.
From: I27LG@CUNYVM.BITNET
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.dragonlance
Date: 6 Apr 92 15:43:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: CUNYVM.92097.114314I27LG
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

YES, Please have a separate place for DragonLance.  It would be better
of and I hope my enthusiasm is similar to yours.

                                Est Sularus Oth Mithas!!
                                My honor is my life!!

                                        Kyramus
                                     Mage of the red robes
                                     Ambassador to the Knights of Solamnia
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: RESULT: misc.activism.{progressive.d,misc} fa
Organization: Small Business Systems, Incorporated, Esmond, RI  02917
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 10:47:05 GMT

In <1992Apr13.181307.16316@uunet.uu.net> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
 
>The voting period for the groups misc.activism.{progressive.d,misc} has ended.
>Both proposals failed to achieve the necessary margin of 100 more YES votes
>than NO votes; therefore, both proposals have failed. Neither proposal even
>got 100 total votes, in fact...here are the results:

>Proposal 1: 57 to 26...margin 31, percent in favor 68.674699
>Proposal 2: 52 to 31...margin 21, percent in favor 62.650602

This doesn't surprise me, as Harel et. al. didn't lobby their various
mailing list readers to vote for/against this one, as they did for 
MAP, thus this group was doomed to failure from the beginning.

MD
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan                      / 
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com            /   I'm not a bigot,
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /    I hate everyone.
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              / 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: J024330@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Where's alt.business.multi-level
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 13:09:23 GMT

Does alt.business.multilevel still exist?  My reader does not seem to pick it
up
From: jkim@jingoro.Eng.Sun.COM (Jun Kim)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga vs. rec.arts.comics.manga
Date: 7 Apr 92 21:04:56 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: jingoro

In article <9-qjx-#@lynx.unm.edu> lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) writes:
>limkiong@vms2.iscs.nus.sg (Twas brillig, and the slithy toves...) writes:
>
>> This has been explained in many ways by many people. Manga is sequential
>> art.  But r.a.c is devoted to the discussion of Western comics. 
>
>Not by design, it isn't.  Have you ever used a library?  "Comics" is a
>*classification*, not a moral judgement on the content of the book. 
>"Comics" is a general term that describes most forms of sequential art;
>"Manga" is a specific subclassification that describes the Japanese form
>and tradition of sequential art.  If r.a.c was called "rec.arts.western-
>comics" then you might have a case.  It's not.  You don't.  
>
>[Stuff deleted]
>
>> Wouldn't comics subscribers oppose rec.arts.manga.comics? 
>
>Of course they would.  Newsgroup names are supposed to go from the general
>to the specific, not the other way 'round.  Rec.arts.manga.comics loses as
>big as rec.food.coca-cola.soft-drinks or soc.religion.baptist.protestant. 
>(As if there were some kind of Coke that *wasn't* a soft drink, or some
>kind of Baptists who *aren't* protestant, or some kind of manga that
>*aren't* comics.)
>

I have to say that from what I remember from being in Korea and Japan,
that there was "manga" but there was nothing known as "comics".  "Manga"
from the U.S. and Europe were call "imported manga".  I'm not sure but
there might be a similar set up in Taiwan, China. Therefore, from that point of
view, I do not see what makes people so certain that manga is a subset
of comics.  Sounds a little narrow-minded to me.

--
Jun Kim                                         jkim@jingoro.Eng.Sun.Com
Sun Microsystems
Mountain View, CA                               "Oboete imasu ka..."
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: rlb@access.digex.com (Richard L. Butler)
Subject: Re: rec.arts.manga...etc.....
Organization: The Fourth Drawer on the Left, Second Column
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 06:52:00 GMT

jkim@jingoro.Eng.Sun.COM (Jun Kim) writes:
>definition.  If someone considers one side to be correct, then manga would
>fall under the definition of "type of comic".  Another viewpoint is that
>the terms are equivalent (like "cars" and "autos"  -- yeah, I know
>it's bad, Duane)  but the discussions topics would be different enough
>to merit two distinct groups. (Not a sub group).

I would agree that the topics discussed in a manga group would merit a group
distinct from rec.arts.comics.  What I fail to understand is why a group named
rec.arts.comics.manga would NOT be distinct from rec.arts.comics?

Most of the r.a.manga proponents keep up the good fight against making "their"
newsgroup a "subgroup" of rec.arts.comics.  This is based on essentially magic
thinking, specifically that Usenet newsgroup names are more than the icons of
a classification system.  Calling the manga group r.a.c.manga does not make
manga any less distinct from non-manga, but it *does* help a lot of English-
speaking people figure out what "manga" are.

In a different post, another r.a.manga proponent commented, "What's a gaffa?".
His opposite number dropped the ball (in my opinion) by failing to point out
that one at least knows that a gaffa has something to do with music, if one
finds it (as one in fact does) "under" rec.music.*.

Similarly, rec.arts.manga is less specific than rec.arts.comics.manga for
the majority of people whose first language is English, which is the language
used most (at this time) in posting to Usenet (there's your next major storm
on Usenet's horizon - adding a new layer of depth to the *entire* Usenet news
hierarchy *at the TOP*, so that people can chat on all of our existing topics
in their native language...  a bottom-level approach to naming newsgroups by
language for the global Usenet would be a nightmare).

Five years ago, I wouldn't have had any idea at all what "manga" are, and now
I own some (translations of manga, anyway;  I don't speak or read Japanese).
I think I could safely say that outside of comics, anime and SF fandom, none
of the people I know (or very, very few) would know what "manga" means.  If
I had to explain it to them, I'd say that manga are the Japanese equivalent
of comic books, even though I know that I am oversimplifying the picture,
since I don't have time to explain how pervasive and broadly accepted manga
are in Japan, as compared to the ghettoization of the comic form that has
changed a *little* bit in the last 3 years.

In closing, let me say that Carthago delenda est, and Francisco Franco is
still dead.

-- 
 Richard L. Butler             rlb@access.digex.com             301-220-2020
 Digital Express Group, 6006 Greenbelt Road #228, Greenbelt, Maryland  20770
   **** Express Access: Online Communications in Washington/Baltimore ****
   * login as "new" for info, 301-220-0462 (Wash) or 410-766-1855 (Balt) *