HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bur@ultisol.gsfc.nasa.gov (MAC)
Subject: Re: billiards
Followup-To: talk.bizarre,misc.test
Organization: Yes.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 23:30:12 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.161655.2836@cnsvax.uwec.edu> hirschgm@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
>[deleted]
>					--Joachim

   |
   |
   |            .
   |        .       .
   |     .             .
   |   .                 .           .         
   |  .                   .      .        .
   | .                     .   .            .
   |.                       . .               .
>>THUD<<                 >>THUD<<         >>PLONK<<

Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: I Sing the Body Smoke!
From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 07:45:19 GMT
Reply-To: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)

In article <1h0np7INNrf9@rave.larc.nasa.gov> kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>In article <160009@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Tony Zugates) writes:
>>
>>Please refrain from it unless you operate with the SPAM group at the 
>>high end of the 40 meter wavelength. (SPAM= society for the preservation
>>of amplitude modulation).                     
>
>Are you implying that there is something wrong with amplitude modulation?
>Me and my 1938 vintage Crosley plate-modulated 2KW BC transmitter have a 
>bone to pick with you.
>
>SSB means group delay across the audio spectrum due to cheap brickwall
>filters.  SSB means nonlinear amplitude response due to errors in detection,
>and floating frequency shifts up and down the audio band.  I hope your next
>QSO is so distorted that you can't even get the full call from the other
>guy, just some exotic, tantalizing prefix.  Maybe that will teach you that
>amplitude modulation is the way to go for any serious work (or DSBSC if
>you mind losing a little power on your carrier.  I don't care about a
>bit more power, since my electric bills are high enough).
>
>May you be sentenced to an eternity in hell with roundworms and a 
>misaligned Heathkit HW-101.

I think it's time to bring back spark gap transmitters.  Due to the fact
that my great grandfather was a patent attorney way back when, I have lots
of vintage how to books on spark gap technology.

And I probably have the parts in my basement.

-- 

Rick Kelly	rmk@rmkhome.UUCP	unixland!rmkhome!rmk	rmk@frog.UUCP
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
From: gooley@netcom.com (Mark. Gooley)
Subject: Re: less than perfect
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 20:43:43 GMT

In article <schnitzi.724782069@eola.cs.ucf.edu> schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius) writes:
>jjh4@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JANE HORVATH) writes:
>
>
>>cindy crawford is not perfect.
>>she's got big, ugly feet.
>
>>-jane
>
>>thoughts like this make me feel better about myself.
>>-- 
>
>I for one have a hard time picturing her sitting down and taking
>a dump.  I am convinced that none of the supermodels ever do this.
>
>mark

Supermodels just fill up with shit.  That's why they have to wear colored
contacts.  When they get really full they discreetly vomit some of it out.

Mark.
gooley@netcom.com
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
From: kschnitz@encore.com (Kevin Schnitzius)
Subject: Re: Will I go to hell just for thinking this?
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 22:14:57 GMT

curtis@cs.berkeley.edu (Curtis Yarvin) writes:
>In article <RANJIT.92Dec19004459@unagi.cis.upenn.edu> ranjit@unagi.cis.upenn.edu (Ranjit Bhatnagar) writes:
>>
>>Granted, the ability to hold a counterfactual to be true for the sake
>>of argument is an essential part of human consciousness; however, this
>>case, in which the two viewpoints are spontaneously expressed in a
>>single utterance, is clearly pathological.

>thwap.  THWAP!  THWAP!  NO!  No we do NOT ALLOW PHILOSOPHERS!

Look, don't hit him, all right?   I'm hoping that he will go on to analyze 
Bryan Addam's tunes next, with similar metaphysical juxtapositioning:

"When the feeling's right,
 I want to stay all night,
 I'm gonna run to you."

Kill me now.
--
!cat .signature
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
From: pfinerty@nyx.cs.du.edu (fun fun fun boy)
Subject: Re: Bad News
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 18:40:36 GMT

ok so, i might as well relent and take the god of bad luck regarding law
enforcement types. oh well...
--
			PJF--->Biochem. grad student
			      PUBLIC ENEMY #1
From: burkhold@next.com (Thomas Burkholder)
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
Subject: guns
Date: 11 Dec 92 21:24:26 GMT

Guns?  Guns don't kill people- it's those damn bullets!

-can't take credit; Lorie is more bizarre than I.
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
From: jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll)
Subject: what is the sound?
Originator: jcarroll@ferris
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 15 Dec 92 01:22:46 CST


In article <1gjvvdINN77h@agate.berkeley.edu>, curtis@cs.berkeley.edu (Curtis Yarvin) writes:
> In article <677@blue.cis.pitt.edu> cap@mb5000.anes.upmc.edu (chris pilewski) writes:
> >
> >I have already thought of "X Set to Music."
> 
> yes; an amazing piece.  it will work wonders on your boss.
> 
> be sure to order early; you have to measure his resonant
> frequency and all, and i've heard x.i. is experiencing severe
> backlogs this holiday season.
> 
> c

What is the sound of a obvious concept flying over the head of a newt?

jkc (forehead spattered with concept guano)
From: mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
Subject: Holiday '93
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 19:28:38 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

I have been officially invited to visit the Soviet Union.  I have the
paperwork to prove it.

Obviously they didn't want to let all the headed stationery go to waste.

Helen asked when I wanted to go.  It is currently -10 celcius in St
Petersburg.  I said "In the middle of summer."


mathew
[ They obviously had fun trying to write my name phonetically in Cyrillic ]

Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
From: graeme@fulcrum.co.uk (Graeme Hodgson)
Subject: Supernatural telecommunications
Summary: Big grey elephants.
Keywords: freaky fax
Organization: Fulcrum Communications
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:05:46 GMT

Heard on the radio this morning (or was it yesterday? can't remember):

"staff in a Berlin bank have been complaining their fax machine is
posessed by the Devil.  For the passed few weeks the machine has
regularly been delivering satanic messages - even when switched off"

Weird, huh?

--
Hodj
Email to graeme@fulcrum.co.uk     |        <witty quote pending>
 - whenever the mood takes you.   |
From: dmccart@gomez.intel.com (D. J. McCarthy)
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: quick philosophy (press 'n' now)
Date: 12 Dec 92 02:54:35 GMT
Organization: Intel ASTG, Santa Clara, CA
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Quick Philosophy:
	Press 'n' Now.







I'll take Unintentionally Profound Subject: Lines for $600, please, Alex.
--
D. J. McCarthy (dmccart@gomez.intel.com)
"I voted for comp.protocols.tcp-ip.eniac!  I am Rich Rosen!
 The net is sweet."
                                          --C.J. Silverio, talk.bizarre, 9/1/92
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
From: cj@eno.esd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio)
Subject: Re: Modern Technology That We Use Here At Work
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 01:42:13 GMT


Mr Dorsey asks:
|Now, why don't modern manuals read like this?

Hmmm.  Hmmm.

---
cj@eno.esd.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"The documentation doesn't mention the mental health problems that 
develop from doing this, but very rarely is documentation this 
comprehensive." --David Bedno, in talk.bizarre
From: bhoughto@sedona.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton)
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: ssc (Re: Will I go to hell just for thinking this?)
Date: 17 Dec 1992 01:06:14 GMT
Organization: Intel Corp., Chandler, Arizona
NNTP-Posting-Host: stealth.intel.com

In article <1992Dec15.193107.27546@walter.cray.com> jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll) writes:
>jkc (ok, so I lied. so the shirt I'm wearing as I type has a little
>     Nordstrom sloop on it. so what?)

So what about the bra?

				--Blair
				  "All my socks are the same."
From: hirschgm@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Supernatural telecommunications
Date: 18 Dec 92 22:06:06 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

In article <BzGstM.27x@fulcrum.co.uk>, graeme@fulcrum.co.uk (Graeme Hodgson) writes:
> Heard on the radio this morning (or was it yesterday? can't remember):
> 
> "staff in a Berlin bank have been complaining their fax machine is
> posessed by the Devil.  For the passed few weeks the machine has
> regularly been delivering satanic messages - even when switched off"
> 
> Weird, huh?
> 
> --
> Hodj
> Email to graeme@fulcrum.co.uk     |        <witty quote pending>
>  - whenever the mood takes you.   |

What's so weird about that?  We have a printer here that bursts into flames
every night at 7:06.  We haven't bothered to do anything about it since it's
always fine by the next morning.

					--Joachim
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre
From: schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius)
Subject: Re: In Search Of
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:30:51 GMT

dschmidt@athena.mit.edu (Dan Schmidt) writes:


>So I was trying to think of the most long-winded sentence in a pop
>song.  Strings such as the Police'

>  "I can't, I can't, I can't stand losing, I can't, I can't, I can't
>  stand losing, I can't, I can't, I can't, I can't stand losing you"

>have been proposed, but currently I think that the prize goes to the
>Buzzcocks'

>  "Ever fallen in love with someone, ever fallen in love, in love with
>  someone, ever fallen in love, in love with someone you shouldn't have
>  fallen in love with, fallen in love with, ever fallen in love with
>  someone you shouldn't have fallen in love with?"

How about back to the Police:

Every little thing she does, every little thing she does, every little,
every little, every little, every little thing she does, every little
thing she does, every little thing she does, things she does is magic,
every little thing, every little thing, every little thing she do is 
magic magic magic, magic magic magic.

mark
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: sheehan@pagosa.scd.ucar.edu (Tim Sheehan)
Subject: RE: Advice from my father
Organization: NCAR/UCAR
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 18:29:27 GMT

In article <mcgeegt.921210030337@eng.auburn.edu>, mcgeegt@eng.auburn.edu (Gary T. McGee) writes:
> [...]
> As far as being public with your experience, I say yes. The more a victim 
> talks about the experience the more they heal. Also, it increases public 
> awareness about rape. Your story may help someone recover from a rape or 
> help prevent one. I encourage you to speak out even if some people say 
> things about you. You know the truth.
> [...]
> Gary McGee

Some months back in either the Boulder or Denver paper, there was an article
about going public with being a victim of sexual abuse. One of the things
the article talked about was the practical damage that can be done to one's
career by such a move.

The article gave the example of a woman who had been an incest victim. She
had talked about that fact at her job. After she had done that, her boss
started descrbing her as depressed and having low self esteem in her
performance reviews.

My point is, before one starts telling people about having been a victim of
sexual abuse (or other personal things) one should consider the possible
consequences.

-- 
-Tim-

sheehan@ncar.ucar.edu
From: peace@igc.apc.org
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: hell yeah
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:31:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:BzBK03.9o8@news.cso.uiuc.edu:-1916214957:cdp:1484100005:000:53
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!peace    Dec 16 13:31:00 1992


I am confused what is the purpose of these postings?
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: huggett@sequent.com (Terri Huggett)
Subject: Re: Rape Law Reform
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 04:12:48 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.174618.2837@news.columbia.edu> dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:
>
>   So, for example, if a prostitute tries to extort additional money from a
>man with threats of rape accusations, and it goes to trial; you say that the
>defence should not be allowed to ask questions or provide evidence that she
>was in fact a prostitute?
>
Not trying to pick on Dan here, because I think his heart is in the right
place, in general, but. . .

The vast majority of the cases involving prostitutes and johns are situations
where the prostitute doesn't get paid or the john does something to which
they did not agree for the price agreed (you don't want to think about what 
that is and it frequently ends in not getting paid too).  In these 
circumstances it is still extremely hard to get a conviction, (guess why!?) 
Can you imagine how much harder it would be if it was extortion?

Terri Huggett
huggett@sequent.com
From: rpetsche@mrg.tmc.edu (Rolfe G. Petschek)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Statutory Rape laws (was) Re: Let's Move On Again.
Date: 21 Dec 92 00:39:37 GMT
Reply-To: rpetsche@mrg.CWRU.EDU (Rolfe G. Petschek)
Distribution: usa
Organization: CWRU Physics Department
NNTP-Posting-Host: mrg.phys.cwru.edu

In article <1gbsejINN55s@mozz.unh.edu> rll1@kepler.unh.edu (Robert L Lamothe) writes:
>In article <78152@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt8834a@prism.gatech.EDU (Cott Lang) writes:
>>In <mcgeegt.921210025619@eng.auburn.edu> mcgeegt@eng.auburn.edu (Gary T. McGee) writes:
>>
>>>		How does everyone feel about the statutory rape laws?
>>I think they're absurd, and discriminatory.
>
>  	I'd have to say that this issue depends on the individuals involved.
>If a 14 year old boy and a 14 year old girl have mutualy willing sex then I'd
>couldn't see having the boy face criminal charges for this, sure lack of 
>judgement may be at play here but not criminal intent.  However if a 19 year
>old boy and a 12 year old girl do the same then I'd have to say that the 19
>year old should face charges.  After all anyone of legal adult status should

Thoughtful suggestions of revisions to the Ohio Revised Code, as always
are greatly welcome.

2907.02  Rape; evidence; marriage or cohabitation not defenses to rape
charges
(A)(1) No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another who is not
the spouse of the offender or who is the spouse of the offender but is
living separate and apart from the offender, when either of the
following apply
 (b) The other person is less than thirteen years of age, whether or
not the offender knows the age of such person.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of rape, an aggravated
felony of the first degree.  If the offender under division (A) (1)(b)
of this section purposely compels the victim to submit by force or
threat of force, whoever violates division (A)(1)(b) of this section
shall be imprisoned for life.
(C) A victim need not prove physical resistance to the offender in
prosecutions under this section.
2907.04 Corruption of a minor
(A) No person, eighteen years of age or older, shall engage in sexual
conduct with another, not the spouse of the offender, when the offender
knows such other person is over twelve but not over fifteen years of
age, or the offender is reckless in that regard.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of corruption of a minor, a
felony of the third degree.  If the offender is less than four years
older than the other person, corruption of a minor is a misdemeanor of
the first degree.

--
Rolfe G. Petschek			Petschek@cwru.bitnet
Associate Professor of Physics		rgp@po.cwru.edu
Case Western Reserve University		(216)368-4035 
Cleveland Oh 44106-7079
From: rll1@kepler.unh.edu (Robert L Lamothe)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Let's Move On Again.
Date: 12 Dec 1992 05:13:55 GMT
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: kepler.unh.edu

In article <78152@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt8834a@prism.gatech.EDU (Cott Lang) writes:
>In <mcgeegt.921210025619@eng.auburn.edu> mcgeegt@eng.auburn.edu (Gary T. McGee) writes:
>
>>Here's yet another topic :
>>		How does everyone feel about the statutory rape laws?
>
>I think they're absurd, and discriminatory.
>
>-- 
>------------             The Digital Wasteland               ------------- 
>                    Renegade BBS Software Home Base 
>             Running under OS/2 on a 486DX/50 with 880 Megs
>        (404)933-9253 16.8k Dual        (404)955-0325 14.4k Dual

  	I'd have to say that this issue depends on the individuals involved.
If a 14 year old boy and a 14 year old girl have mutualy willing sex then I'd
couldn't see having the boy face criminal charges for this, sure lack of 
judgement may be at play here but not criminal intent.  However if a 19 year
old boy and a 12 year old girl do the same then I'd have to say that the 19
year old should face charges.  After all anyone of legal adult status should
know better than to take advantage of an impressionable child.  I guess for
me its a matter of degree.
							-Bob
.

-- 
---
 Robert L. Lamothe                           University of New Hampshire  
 rll@unh.edu                                 Interoperablity lab room 220  
                                                                             
 Just because you're not paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you.  
---
From: gt8834a@prism.gatech.EDU (Cott Lang)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Let's Move On Again.
Date: 11 Dec 92 23:56:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <mcgeegt.921210025619@eng.auburn.edu> mcgeegt@eng.auburn.edu (Gary T. McGee) writes:

>Here's yet another topic :
>		How does everyone feel about the statutory rape laws?

I think they're absurd, and discriminatory.

-- 
------------             The Digital Wasteland               ------------- 
                    Renegade BBS Software Home Base 
             Running under OS/2 on a 486DX/50 with 880 Megs
        (404)933-9253 16.8k Dual        (404)955-0325 14.4k Dual
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: sheehan@pagosa.scd.ucar.edu (Tim Sheehan)
Subject: Re: Advice from my father
Organization: NCAR/UCAR
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 19:12:11 GMT

In article <GPRIORES.92Dec9165118@fish.oracle.com>, gpriores@oracle.com (gordon prioreschi) writes:
> 
> Unfortunately, our society currently seems to confer special
> priveliges, both tangible and psychological, on those who can claim
> "victim" status. Thus you see the present rash of people jumping on
> the "victim" bandwagon, appearing on Oprah spewing about how much
> they've been through, etcetera. It's been observed that we're fast
> becoming a "nation of victims."
> 
> One of the unfortunate effects of this is that it both diminishes the
> credibility and devalues the suffering of a real victim. It's much
> like false accusations of rape in that respect. Really sucks if you've
> got a legitimate grievance (as you've probably figured out).
> 
>                                     Strength,

I think there is already a reaction to what your talking about.

Some of the definitions that Bradshaw and some like him use for sexual
abuse are so inclusive, that virtually everyone in the population is
a victim of sexual abuse. I have read definitions of psychological sexual
abuse that include someone telling a dirty joke within earshot of a child.

While I think such behavior is inappropriate, I hate to see it bear the
same label as the intense, damaging abuse that many have suffered. As 
Gordon said above, it devalues the suffering of the real victims.

A book called 'I'm Dysfunctional, You're Dysfunctional' has recently come
out. I haven't read it, but from what I've heard, it discusses the victim
mentality that 12 step groups supposedly impose on their members. In effect
(anyone having read it, please correct me if I am wrong here) it is an
attempt to expose the victim mentality that is becoming prevalent in out
society.

My fear is that the reaction of society will be that since everybody is a
victim, then nobody is a victim. If this happens, the real victims of real
abuse may be left out in the cold, labelled as whiners.

-- 
-Tim-

sheehan@ncar.ucar.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Sunday, 20 Dec 1992 14:32:55 CST
From: <U53415@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Contracts (was Re: Rape Law Reform)
 <1992Dec18.154250.5187@news.columbia.edu> <1992Dec18.215509.15459@sequent.com>
 <1992Dec19.011241.3212@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>

Terri Huggett says:

>>paint his house if he chooses not to pay you.  Thus, in contract law, and
>this
>>is how the legal system has interpreted the case in many states, the         e
>prostitut
>>agrees to sex for money.  She DOES NOT agree to sex.  Therefore, if the
>>john does not pay her, he has raped her because she DID NOT consent to sex.
>>He has technically defrauded her as well, but that is a legally
>>unenforceable part of the contract.  It is very rare for a prostitute to
>>bring such a charge and for a prosecutor to take such a case, and it almost
>>always involves serious injury.
>
David Ash argues:
>Wow!!!  By this legal reasoning, suppose a guy tells a woman that he wants to
>postpone sex until after marriage.  He and the gal enter into a marriage
>contract specifying (among other things) that she will love, honor and keep
>him forsaking all others until death do they part.  She doesn't keep her end
>of the contract.6=ince this contract was part of his condition to have sex,
>she has raped him by the above reasoning.  Or am I missing something?  The
>situation seems completely parallel to me;  furthermore I could imagine there
>could be a few guys (devout Christians) who would want to press charges in
>this situation.

I don't claim to be a legal expert, but it would seem that in the first
case (that of the prostitute and the john), only one oral contract is
made - the john agrees to pay and the prostitute agrees to sex.

In the second case, it looks like there are two oral contracts.  In
the first, the woman agrees to assent to the marriage contract and
the man agrees to sex.  The second oral contract is the marriage
contract itself.  The woman would have kept her end of the first contract,
but broken the second.  She did, after all, assent to the marriage
contract as promised; she simply broke it at a later date.
Therefore, she would not be a rapist by Terri Huggett's reasoning.

Mitch Pollack
Dept. of Math, Statistics, and Comp. Sci.
University of Illinois at Chicago