HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sac@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Drug testing and welfare
Date: 29 Jul 92 16:13:53 -0500

In article <92210.190047JMS111@psuvm.psu.edu>, Jenni Sheehey <JMS111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> yarvin@highlite.uucp (Curtis Yarvin) says:
>>In article <92206.093638JMS111@psuvm.psu.edu> Jenni Sheehey
>><JMS111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>
>>The wisdom of the sages.  Duh.
>>
>>"Why is doing drugs wrong?"
>>        "Because it's illegal."
>>
>>"Why are drugs illegal?"
>>        "Because, uh, they're _wrong_."

I just had to include this. It's classic (and there seems to be a lot of this 
type of reasoning around lately.


> No.  "Why shouldn't people use money to buy illegal drugs?"
>          "Because they're illegal."
> 
>      "Why are drugs illegal?"
>         "Because people who are now probably dead, but were
>          elected by citizens of this country, made a law against
>          it.  I don't think it's wise to use them, but if you
>          think they're ok, you're welcome to try to change the
>          law."

But, my little chick-a-dee, those duly elected representatives do not
necessarily hold the majority opinion. (See Bush/Quayle.alt.babble.pro-life)

I don't think it's wise to try and change the law, but you're welcome 
to try them. (heh heh)

> Peeve: People who assume that everyone who disagrees with them has
> poorly thought out views.

I'm shocked at you! Jenni, Jenni, Jenni...you should realize by now that
this is alt.peeves. Anyone who disagrees *DOES* have poorly though out views.

>>When I think the law is wrong, I _break_ it.

> Peeve: People who think that disobedience is better than reform.

Disobedience is easier than reform. And if enough skofflaws exist disobedience
necessarily brings about reform. (Just walk into the shrink where ever you
are, sing a bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walk out.)
Just as an example look at the equal rights ammendment. All the reformers in
this country haven't been able to pass that law and it's LOOOOONG past due.
I say if the wives of the men of the capitol got together and staged a 
nookie strike for the passage of the ERA it would get passed right quick!

Yours in your dreams

Scott A. Chasse
U of Fl-Ft. Lauderdale 
Reasearch Station

Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: donp@twg.com (Don Pette)
Subject: Re: radio stuff
Organization: The Wollongong Group, Palo Alto, CA
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 18:22:30 GMT

In article <l6rpddINN4lu@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff TAW-rus Miller) writes:
>
> bunch o' stuff deleted
>
>I was reluctant to say anything, even though my friend is one of the 
>more relaxed people I know and wouldn't have taken offense, simply 
>because I didn't want to be a pain in the ass on what was supposed to 
>be a badly needed day off. 

Geoffy, Geoffy, Geoffy

Reluctant to say anything? Didn't want to be a pain? I can't believe
I even read this. I had to read it twice to make sure of what I was
seeing. Geoff, whose particularly picturesque verbage keeps us coming
back for more abuse and titillation. Geoff, who at one time had most
of Sun.junk in an uproar (I know, I was there). Jeez dude, what's up?

Peeve: The alt.peeves god getting limpdick.
From: JMS111@psuvm.psu.edu (Jenni Sheehey)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Drug testing and welfare
Date: 28 Jul 92 23:21:01 GMT
 <l78a4hINNl4l@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
Organization: Penn State University

Speaking of sheep, banta@blagg.Eng.Sun.COM (242 lbs before cooking)
bleats along after the herd, saying:
>
>Jenni Sheehey <JMS111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>"This welfare thing is just disgusting." She also said, "Can the Fourth
>>Amendment really mean that the government cannot search your home, but
>>they can search your body?"
>>
>>To that I say, "Hell, yes, in this case."
>
>Pardon me, Jen, but aren't you currently on the state's dole, working
>for a state university and all?

Why is it that none of you can seem to see the difference between
working for money and getting it free?

>That means the the taxpayers pick up
>tab when you go off on maternity leave.

That would be lovely, if I was entitled to maternity leave, or to sick
leave, or anything else of the sort.  If you were trying to follow in
the footsteps of everyone else by attempting to bring the thing closer
to home, you failed.  Sorry.

>Therefore I feel it's a good idea for you to
>take a pregnancy test, in the presence of your boss, before receiving
>each and every paycheck.  If the test comes back positive, you have
>the option of being whisked to the nearest clinic for a D&C, followed
>by a month of therapy or leaving your job.

Gee, is pregnancy illegal in California?  I knew there were some strange
laws over there, but I was born there, and I don't recall my mother
having a criminal record.

>Come to think of it, the pregnancy test doesn't quite have the
>invasiveness that a drug test does.  I won't be satisfied until you
>have to have a full pelvic exam on a regular basis, with your boss,
>his boss, and three of your peers in attendance.

Peeve: "reductio ad absurdam" as a form of argument.  If you can't argue
with the facts as they are, you have no argument.

                                                 --Jenni
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Truth and security peeve
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 21:29:06 GMT


I have been advised that a person will be speaking about
matters of a 'security breach' to usenet.....

An interesting topic for discussion.

The problem is trying to explain the nature of why it
will be a most interesting event.

If the person is giving an "open Source" level of
secuirty briefing to persons who do not have a 'need to know'
and a security level clearance high enough to deal with 
the significant issues then:

1. he will not be able to discuss if classified sites were
in point of fact compromised, or were only their non_classified
publicly accessible portions compromised.

2. to discuss the compromising of secured sites in an open source
environment means that the nature of the data has to be declassified.
Hence what can be said is only what occurs in regards to the NonClassified
portions of those sites, hence it is that there can be no discussion
of the nature of the compromise of secured sites.

3. To discuss the nature of the compromise of secured sites in 
a declassed environment is itself a violation of the security standards,
and hence is requesting that the person vilate security and 
compromise those sites.

4. to discuss only the nature of compromises of insecure sites
is to discuss what happens when the door is not closed, namely
that there are persons who will walk in.

5. Why is it that SecurityIssues are Taoist in Nature:
"That which is the SecurityIssue that can be spoken of,
Is NOT the true SecurityIssue that is."

6. Be One with the True Nature of the SecurityIssue.


ciao
drieux

ps: this posting will self destruct, should any of this
information be retained by YOU, You will be obliged to Self Destruct.

SecurityLevelClassification: Burn Before Reading.

ObPeeve: Reality is never as simple as it appears....


-- 
I Do Not Believe in .sig files
as they are such a Known Waste Of BandWidth,
And Therefore Not a Morally UpRight Choice.
But I Can See the HideousHienousHandOfHeteroSexualityBehindItAll.
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: Chimpanzees/Olympic Games
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 18:27:08 GMT

<In article <24266@castle.ed.ac.uk> egev05@castle.ed.ac.uk (B A Page) writes:
<   In article <40075@skye.dcs.ed.ac.uk> Not_Al_Crawford@ed.ac.uk (Not Al Crawford) writes:

<>The Olympics. I don't plan to watch them if I can possibly avoid it.

<But...

	Eh, he's just saying that to try to fit in with the
	rest of the tv-hating peevers.

	Akshooly, Not Al prolly has several TV sets, each
	tuned to a different channel (cricket, rugby, US
	cop shows, CNN) with a different remote control
	for each in his lap.

<   >Peeve: Another peeve by proxy. Anyone see the Swaziland team during the
<   >opening ceremony? 

<   You mean you actually CHOSE to watch the opening ceremony?  The most
<   tedious and americophilic part of the entire peevesome caboodle?

	"Americophilic"? What does Signori Vespucci have to do
	with the olypmics?

<Am I the only one who sees some slight inconsistency here?

	Probably; the rest of the peevers are secretly seeing
	"Andy Griffith".....

Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Drug testing and welfare
Reply-To: z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Organization: PETA: People for the Eating of Tasty Activists
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 16:48:52 GMT

Jenny Sheehey <JMS111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>In article <a5qkoB16w165w@mantis.co.uk>, mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk> says:
>
>>Has it occurred to you that people might want to choose to take drugs?  That
>>they might do so occasionally, without becoming addicted?
>
>I don't really care whether they want to or not, if they're using my
>money to do so.

	It's not your money once the Govmint gives it to them.  Think about
that.  It's not your money, it's Govmint money, and they can spend it any
way they damn well please.  Your lost your ability to control it when you
wrote that check to the IRS.

>You don't have Narcotics Anonymous over there?  I know quite a few
>people who have been over here.  Because nobody forced them, they were
>allowed to totally and completely screw up their lives before receiving
>any treatment.  They lost jobs, spouses, they had debtors following them
>everywhere, lost cars, homes...  I'm sure they're really glad now that
>everyone just let them rot.

	On the other hand, there are many thousands of casual users who
are really glad that we leave them to rot if they so choose.  Funny, isn't
it, that the only people who think they should be taken care of are those
who have already screwed up and can't find the testicular mass to do
anything constructive about their situation?  Whining doesn't count.

>Well, given the fact that the bill doesn't propose to put anyone in
>jail, but merely force them to get treatment...

	It *merely* forces treatment?  There's nothing that pisses off
people more than having Big Brother tell us what's good for us.  That
bill should be wadded into a ball, stuffed into a mandatory motorcycle
helmet, and inserted into the rectum of the legislator in question.
You may insert it from either end -- I don't care.

>>Yeah.  Let's jail all those law-breakers who engage in oral sex or sex
>>outside marriage.  They have no right to have sex, so lock 'em up.
>
>If it's important enough to them to break the law, it's important enough
>to try to change the law.  Those things aren't illegal in a lot of states.

	Stealing cattle is still a capitol offense here in Iowa.  That the
law says it's illegal doesn't mean the law is relevant or even right, but
since it's not enforced why bother changing it?  Let it quietly die.


--
<Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"There'll be angels on Ariels in leather>
<z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | and chrome, Ridin' down from heaven    >
<viking@iastate.edu      | just to carry me home." -- R. Thompson >
< ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee. >
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: yarvin@highlite.uucp (Curtis Yarvin)
Subject: Re: Trundling along, looking for the right bandwagon
Organization: Gotham Communications Research
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 19:15:47 GMT

In article <k49coB26w165w@mantis.co.uk> mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk> writes:
>donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) writes:
>> In article <23996@castle.ed.ac.uk> fofp@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Holmes) writes:
>> >Curtis the yapping poodle write:
>> >>>Old ones:  Heinlein, Elison, Clarke, Kornbluth, Pohl, LeGuin, others.
>> >>Slop-mongers all.
>
>If "Elison" is a reference to Harlan Ellison, Curtis should be shot as a
>warning to others.

You'll need more examples for a good warning; most everyone loathes Harlan
Ellison.  Not, admittedly, for his fiction (which is indifferent-to-good),
but because he's a right insufferable bastard.

Myself I don't mind that.  What peeves me is that Ellisons's so good at
insufferable bastardry as to humiliate my ambitions.

c
From: fofp@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Holmes)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Drug testing and welfare
Date: 25 Jul 92 15:10:12 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

Jeese, this Yoosan pogrom on drugs is beginning to get a little out of
hand. Let's see: if you want a job, you sometimes gotta pee in a bottle?
If they find a weed in your garden (one that the Guvmint used to
encourage everyone to grow) they can take your house. Now if you want
welfare, you gotta pee in a bottle too?

Jenni seems to have a fair point in that if folks want "Guvmint" money
then the Guvmint is entitled to ensure that it's spent in a socially
approved manner. Fair enough, iunless the welfare is the due proceeds of
what amounts to unemployment insurance. If you've paid the taxes and you
get into a position that you need the results, then surely it's up to
you to decide how best to spend it?

Then again, I'm not real impressed by the argument that the Guvmint has
a legitimate interest in what goes on in folks bodies anyway. Seems to me
though, that if the Guvmint (and by implication the population) wants to
decide what welfare benefits buy, then they should go out and buy it
then hand it to 'em. That'd save a whole lotta folks the indignity of
peeing in bottles and the Guvmint the worry that folks are buying drugs.

Here's a question though: do politicians have to pee in bottles before
voting in Congress etc? They're quite clearly paid out of Guvmint funds,
and hell, one stoned Senator and a stupidly cast vote could do a lot more
damage than anyone on welfare is likely to manage in a lifetime. Maybe
you'd be better using lie detectors on 'em while you're at it. If
they're receiving Guvmint money, the least you'd want to buy for it is
the truth. 

FoFP

"Sick of politicians, harrassment and laws
 All we do is get screwed up by other people's flaws"

   -- Hawkwind "Psychedelic Warlords"
From: egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Peeve Song
Date: 31 Jul 92 11:05:03 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

[... Mike's witty ditty deleted ..]

Admit it, Mike, you copied this out of an Ayn Rand book.


-- 
-Jeremy Henderson        egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk   

(or am I?)
From: geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Micro Beards (was something else entirely)
Followup-To: alt.peeves
Date: 28 Jul 1992 17:07:15 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Menlo Park, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: purplehaze.corp.sun.com



In article <btmmnx@lynx.unm.edu> hillman@carina.unm.edu (Dan Hillman) writes:

>Peeve: What do you call a collection of music. It's not necessarily an
>"album" any more. It might not be on a "disc" format. So what the hell is
>the generic term for it?


It's still an album.  It may not be the *original* album that any of
the songs were released on, but it's still a collection of songs 
that's sold as a unit, which is what an album is -- an anthology or
"greatest hits" album in this case.

Peeve:  My officemate is wearing out the phone again.  Every time I think
she's finally finished, I hear her punch the keypad yet again.  And then
by the time she stops making calls, the phone will start ringing as all
the people who've been trying to call *her* are suddenly able to get
through.  Then by the time that's over with, there'll be yet another 
steady procession of people walking in to talk to her, including her
chatterbox little friend from downstairs who spends half her time in
our office.  (Oh shit, three guesses who just walked in...)



Geoff


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
     "It was the single most satisfying thing I've ever done, with the
     possible exception of various incidents involving high explosives."
                                                -- Dan Sorenson
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
From: egev05@castle.ed.ac.uk (B A Page)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: The Invisible Enemy
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:28:46 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University Department of Infection and Contagion

Any Brit who happened to have seen the documentary series of the above
name may have an inkling of what my peeve is all about.  This series
described how (bloody cursed darn beasties) bugs have done their bit to
shape our society.  Very interesting but a bit disturbing, especially
when the programme starts describing the early stages of pneumonic
plague and they are startlingly similar to the symptoms I have been
suffering all weekend.  

Peeve;  I have already told the Net World that I have given up smoking. 
One would assume that this would result in a New, Healthy Babs. 
Couldn't be further from the truth.  

Bronchitis, tracheitis, tonsilitis and the accompanying discomfort
caused by antibiotics.  

Thanks, God.

PartingPeeve;  This is one that has pissed me off for ages.  Every time
I logon/logoff in fact.  I am a good touch typist.  Why is it that every
time I logon it takes 5 minutes and 15 different spellings?  Ditto when
I logoff.  

Sample.

H:\LOGIN>lgoon
H:\LOGIN>Lggon
H:\LOGIN>Loog.n

etc etc.

Babs
From: fofp@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Holmes)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Drug testing and welfare
Date: 29 Jul 92 18:59:33 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University



>In article <1992Jul27.184207.1@husky1.stmarys.ca> cs226a030@husky1.stmarys.ca writes:

[....on some forms of adult, consensual sex being illegal in the US..]

>>Actually, here in Canada, I think both of those are legal. If they aren't,
>>then "they" DON'T have a right to have those forms of sex. Just because you
>>*think* that something should be legal, doesn't mean you have a right to do it.

Now this simply amazes me. How in hell did we ever get into a position
where we allowed governments to dictate what we can and can't do in our
own bedrooms?

Peeve: this applies to Britain too.

FoFP
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: hillman@carina.unm.edu (Dan Hillman)
Subject: Re: BDI On Board
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 07:14:56 GMT
Organization: Holy Order of Quadra 950 Lust

In article <5631@catnip.berkeley.ca.us> dre@catnip.berkeley.ca.us (Please Fondle My Buttocks) writes:
>
>Btw, !Al, if you ride your pooch in the back of your pickup truck, it
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>needs to be strapped in or tied down so it won't flop over the side.

Or run away...

-- 
| _   ;/                                                          Dan Hillman
|(")_/   "I'm right and you're not."                   hillman@carina.unm.edu
|~~/                                                 University of New Mexico
|~/                                               Land of Fucking Enchantment
From: mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: BDI On Board
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 11:41:08 BST
Distribution: world
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

yarvin-norman@CS.YALE.EDU (Norman Yarvin) writes:
> It's a general principle: smaller animals are more resistant to being thrown
> around.
[...]
> The reason for the principle is that weight increases with an animal's
> volume, but bone strength increases with the cross-sectional area of the
> bone.  An animal scaled up 2x in all directions would have 4x bone
> cross-sectional area, and 8x weight.  Thus the bones in large animals have
> to be a higher proportion of the animal.  And even with more bone, large
> animals are more delicate with regard to getting thrown around.

Also, younger animals have softer bones, whereas older animals have bones
which are brittle and break easily.


mathew
-- 
This disclaimer does not represent the views of Mantis Consultants Ltd
From: mhart@blackjack.dt.navy.mil (Michael Hart)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Drug testing and welfare
Date: 31 Jul 92 10:24:26 GMT

(I would like to return this TOBACCONIST; it is scratched) writes:

>Well, I'll say it for her:
>	execute people who are on welfare for more than say, 6 weeks


Ahh, my favorite motto:

All extremists should be killed.


--
|   Michael G. Hart                   mhart@blackjack.dt.navy.mil    |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
|     You think _I_ speak for the government or the navy?  HAH!      |
| Aviation, computers, quality improvement, Northern Exposure, money |
From: dac@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au (Andrew Clayton)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: stationery that bites back
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 09:36:08 GMT
Reply-To: munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolix!dac
FollowUp-To: alt.peeves
Keywords: 
Organization: More like Dis~, really.

In article <39328@skye.dcs.ed.ac.uk>, Not Al Crawford writes:

> Peeve: the departmental staplers. There are few things in this world that

Peeve: Someone replaced my WORKING stapler, with a clunky model
that spews out two staples at a time, and jams frequently.

> 5. You give in and use a paperclip. Now you know where you are with a

...

> turning perfectly good paperclips into little twisty bits of useless wire
> (I plead guilty as charged)

Playing around with paperclips is horribly addictive [not having
USEnet access at work means boredom is a constant enemy ...]. I
think a personal best was using multiple mangulated paperclips to
tie four penlight [aa] batteries together, and then use another
paperclip and some metal spacers, to short out the batteries -
sort of the worlds dimmest torch; works okay if you just want to
illuminate one piece of wire in the very-low-infra-red range.

But you were talking about staplers, so on with my
stapler-replacement story;

A new device that has taken the office by storm, is a
paperclipping gadget that you load up with small metal clips, and
push onto your multisheet document. The gadget opens up the clip,
and pushes it out onto the sheets, where the clip sproings down,
clamping the paper together. Excellent device. Even if it is
Japanese. :-)

Dac
--
munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolix!dac      David Andrew Clayton.           // _| _  _
  prolix!dac%eyrie@labtam.oz.au      Canberra, Australia           \X/ (_](_](_
        dac@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au      I post .
prolix!dac@sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au            . . I am.             +61 6 290 2215