HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wtr@mitre.org (Bill Ralston)
Subject: Re: Charlie (was Kiran)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 16:36:43 GMT

in article <1992Aug25.152331.16939@news.acns.nwu.edu> 
drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max) posts:

>In article <1992Aug25.133404.1251@cbfsb.cb.att.com> 
jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com >(james.j.dutton) writes:
>> 
>>What's the stat's on this Charlie?
>> 
>Anybody heard from Charlie? Maybe his advisor put a lock on net.access till
>he defended his thesis?

Ssshhhh.  Don't give my advisor any ideas!  He thinks I'm busy working!

---------------
wtr@mitre.org
** Opinions are mine only, and not my employer's **
From: swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Stupid Newsgroup
Date: 2 Sep 92 03:30:46 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: UB

In article <1992Sep1.222201.12237@tamsun.tamu.edu> peram@cs.tamu.edu (Suresh B Peram) writes:
>
>	Hope you people think before you post your
>	junk.

Well, I thought about it.

-- 
Steve Swann                 |    Speak to me in many voices; make
swann@acsu.buffalo.edu      |      them all sound like one...  -BOC
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Date: 25 Aug 92 20:45:54 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Aug25.193806.117@walter.bellcore.com> nobody writes:
>In article <1992Aug25.172028.9358@cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu writes:
>
>Just turn around Nancy's argument. Perhaps, it is *you* that is the cause of
>meeting (i.e., noticing) far more individualistic women than moldable ones.
>Perhaps, you subconsciously ignore women that don't assert themselves.
>Argument works both ways, doesn't it?

Walter, that WAS my point.  It got deleted in this response but go read
back.  You didn't turn around Nancy's argument.  Nancy wasn't even arguing.
>
>>>>Don't blame all women, Rich.  Blame your choices and start making smarter
>>>>ones.
>>>I presume you are not speaking for all women.
>>I don't believe she said that she was.  Far from it.
>
>She didn't say it. But when she asserts that it is Rich's problem that
>he makes such choices, she is indeed assuming that she knows what the majority
>of the women are like or at least what the majority of women where Rich lives
>are like.

Walter?  I made no such assumption.  Did you maybe take the High School
Debate Team a little too seriously?  You don't NEED to counterpoint, Walter.
People like you anyway.  Really, they do.  Honest.
>
>Unless, she is speaking for all women, her personal observations are
>not any more or less valid than Rich's.

Tell ya what Walter.  You go run out and ask every woman in the
world if she agrees with what I said.  If all the answers are yes, then
I was speaking for all women and my pointsw are 100% valid and then you
can argue something else.  Now scoot.  We're waiting.  Shoo!

-Nance
-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
                            (_) \(_)                           
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: How'd You Get Here?? (Was: Lurkers)
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 03:43:29 GMT

In article <4075@moscom.UUCP> wjb@moscom.UUCP (Bill de Beaubien) writes:

>I'll definitely second the vote for better newsreaders.

I'll vote for better newsposters.  (Well, somebody had to say it.)

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 10:15:43 GMT

In <5067@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:

>In article <14428@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>>We'll why don't you ask someone out.  Wait,  you already did that didn't
>>you?  Eating alone sucks doesn't it.  Especially for someone that likes
>>to cook.  

>I haven't asked anyone out because I don't *know* anybody yet.  I'm pretty
>forward, but I draw the line at mugging complete strangers (although that
>line can get pretty blurred after enough Tequila Sunrises have gone down
>the hatch)!  I only know one man in town, and he's my ex, and there just isn't
>enough tequila on the planet to make *that* seem like a good idea.

	Alright, you don't actually *know* anyone yet....  To what extent
do you mean *know*??? (I am presuming you don't mean the biblical sense
here!:)     Are you even vaguely acquainted with a few people yet?
If you are, then invite them to dinner!  I am a firm believer in asking
near strangers to dinner.  I don't mean pick up people on the street, as
you may put your self in very dicey situations but if you know about 3
or 4 people vaguely then ask them all to your house.  I have made so 
many friends that way. I quite simply tell them [when they look surprised
at my invitation] that I like to meet new people and I love to feed people
so I generally do both together!:)
It works!
 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle)
Subject: Re: Why lurkers lurk ...
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 08:15:22 GMT

Ross Ridge <ross@zooid.guild.org> writes:

>I have a policy of not saying something that I would regret 
>if everybody heard.

This is, of course, a good way to avoid being open to blackmail.
-- 
Kiran Wagle     <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>     (812) 335-0420
From: keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: SOC.SINGLES
Date: 28 Aug 92 20:43:47 GMT
Organization: California-Nevada Methodist Homes

In article <1992Aug26.164427.23078@news.columbia.edu> ta-vg11@muddnext4.cc.columbia.edu (Vikas Gupta) writes:
>What is this news group about??
>About people who want to be singles?
>About people who don't want to be singles?
>About people who just happen to be singles?
>Please enlighten this lost sole( or is it soul?? (see !! totally lost))

Hey Vikas!
	From the title of the group, one would assume that this 
is for singles to "converse" and socialize.  Every once in a while,
a thread about dating or sex will come up and make things interesting,
but most of the time, it's the same old people talking with each
other, and wondering about those who don't post.  Even though
1000's of people see this group everyday, you can almost count the
ones who post here on a consistent basis.  From what I've been
able to figure out, this group is for discussing just about 
anything, and has almost nothing to do with whether one is single
or not.  
	A little note though, the most interesting posts come 
from "Angelwing".  She is a hot babe!
--Keith

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle)
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 16:03:59 GMT

diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>nobody@noplace.nil (Walter Lego) writes:

>>Hmm... "Hungry, broke female looking for a dinner companion". Not quite the
>>same ring. It is all in the phrasing, I guess.

>If someone around here knew of a good place for wings, I'd probably hock
>one of my parrots and buy some!  I'm broke, but I'm also awfully tired 
>of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.  (And of eating alone)!

(c)  You are welcome to come over for dinner anytime.  Do try and give
me a couple days notice so's I can fire up the stockpot and pick the
raspberries.

(b) Try turning the peanut butter into Thai peanut sauce, and have it
over rice with cheap vegetables--onions and red, yellow, and green bell
peppers go well.  I can send you a recipe if you like.

(a) When I want to eat skin, bones, and gristle, I eat rib tips.  
(Ribs don't have gristle.)  I never eat rib tips.

>>You must differentiate the self-sufficiency while initiating mating rituals
>>from self-sufficiency after successful mating. Seems like reasonable
>>neediness is tolerated and encouraged at the latter stage while
>>discouraged at the former stage. I think single men and women are
>>victims of their own rules.

>However, I suspect you're right that a certain amount of dependency
>is expected to develop rather than be present right at the start.  

Yup. Once again, Walter, in his urbane and erudite way, 
hits the nail squarely upon the head.  

If you have needs before a relationship starts, you're "desperate."
If you don't have needs after it starts, you're "emotionally
unavailable."  

I think most people deserve what they get. 
(Some people, of course, aren't getting any.)

-- 
"In spite of this new light on the subject, one still meets people
 who believe that Salamaders live in the fire, and they all want to
 argue.  That's why I seldom go out any more."
 ...........................Will Cuppy, _How to Attract The Wombat_
-- 
Kiran Wagle     <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>     (812) 335-0420
From: falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Mea Culpa
Date: 3 Sep 1992 02:42:39 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine
Keywords: cynical net.veterans

>>9.1 on the Suckup Scale.

>No, Aahz, this is an easy ten.  You better recalibrate your SuckUpMeter.

Feh.  It's not a ten if there's still keyboards out there in netland
that haven't been barfed on.

		-ed falk, sun microsystems
		 sun!falk, falk@sun.com
	"Towards the end, the smell of their air began to change"
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: Boston Baby Boink!
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 22:22:58 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Keywords: Paaahty, Baaahston, Wicked Pissah!
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Aug30.205433.19172@cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:

>In <thurlow.715065610@convex.convex.com> thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes:
>>Soc.Singles!  It's a new toy every day!  Didn't you read your warranty
>>card before you sent it in?

>Mine didn't come with a warranty card, just a piece of paper that said, "I
>hope you know what you're in for..."

Ah, I guess you didn't notice that the dot above the little "i" was
actually microscript?  :-)

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
Across the evening sky, all the birds are leaving
But how can they know it's time for them to go?		- Sandy Denny
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Date: 3 Sep 92 12:56:11 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <kiran.715501437@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>You must meet loads of men during your daily activities.  You don't need

Not really.  There are only two guys in my year; one's married, and I've
only seen the other twice.  Most of the professors are married, and I really
wouldn't quite know how to make a pass at a professor anyway.  (It's not
the age difference I'd have a problem with, but the rank difference).

>Huh.  Don't let people around here know that; you'll be labelled "needy"...

Yes!  I admit it!  I am insatiably desperately dependent on having another
person sit across from me during dinner and make small talk.  (A weird
need, but mine own. :-))  Oh, well, to paraphrase Cher, "Sooner or later
we all eat alone."

>As for the company, I'm sure you're quite charming.  

Oh, god, I can hear everyone out there warming up their Suck-O-Meters. 

>And ambience depends on the company, after all... ;)

Yeah, but it's difficult to make dinner-table conversation with *myself*.

>Kiran Wagle     <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>     (812) 335-0420

			--Diamond
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Powerful forces of nature conspire
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:37:48 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Aug25.210604.11207@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>   Oh Lord.  Thank you for conspiring to make this, the first day of in-person
>registration at a University with one of the largest coed student populations in
>the nation, a sweltering hot day.  I will never again ask for anything again.
>My life is truly fulfilled. :)

What, did you get laid?
If so, we want details, sir!
r.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ta-vg11@muddnext4.cc.columbia.edu (Vikas Gupta)
Subject: SOC.SINGLES
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:44:27 GMT

What is this news group about??


About people who want to be singles?

About people who don't want to be singles?


About people who just happen to be singles?

Or about what?

Please enlighten this lost sole( or is it soul?? (see !! totally lost))

My e-mail add:

ta-vg11@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Where the best posts come from
Date: 31 Aug 92 22:10:33 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <la4pdaINNl25@news.bbn.com> dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>Isn't anybody going to mention any men?  How about the sensitive james
>dutton?  Or Steve Swann?  Or James Nicole?  Or.... whoops, I guess it's 
>a waste of time to suck up to the men, huh?
>
>Dawn

I *was* going to mention Charlie, but since he doesn't seem to be around
to suck up to it did seem like a waste of time.  However, if you're going
to divide the men in the group into two categories, one that deserves silly
net.adoration and one that doesn't, I couldn't let Charlie's name be
placed in the second category. :-)

				--Diamond
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Subject: Brownies
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 05:41:10 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <nybnk8l.aahz@netcom.com> aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius) writes:
>In article <1992Aug26.111713.6554@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome) writes:
>>Allisson  (Trust me, I was a Girl Scout and a Brownie)-- 
>A chocolate Brownie?

Sigh- I remember, long (sorta) ago- my sister was in Brownies (shes a year
younger than I). They would hold their brownie neetings at our house. I
remember fondly chasing them around the front yard, and putting them in
the side yard till they got bored and left and I would have to chase them
down again. Damn, that was fun :) 
r.
(though I really didn't have much of a clue as to >why< it was fun then :)
From: jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Why lurkers lurk ...
Date: 31 Aug 92 22:16:46 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

Ross Ridge <ross@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>I have a policy of not saying something that I would regret
>if everybody heard.

Thank goodness Ross Ridge is in the minority. If more people thought like this,
my policy of not saying anything that isn't sarcastically abusive would render
me speechless.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Aloysius McVeigh |"New Yorkers...see their city as being made up of...
jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu  | several million different ideas and forces, problems
      **********        | and losses, horrors and triumphs, each one of which
      "N.I.N.A."        | must be subject to scrutiny..."        - Roger Angell                          to a separate conclusion."             - Roger Angell
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: probst@selkirk.sfu.ca (Scott Probst)
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 02:19:23 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.010034.15576@linus.mitre.org> wtr@mitre.org (Bill Ralston) writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.175115.20378@news.acns.nwu.edu>, 
>drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max) writes:
>> I guess I differentiate between needing and wanting. I can want my lover's
>> attention like mad, but still not need it. Just because something is not
>> needed does not make it unimportant. 
>
>in article <1992Sep1.203238.22431@odin.corp.sgi.com>, 
>lana@magenta.corp.sgi.com (Lana Mountford) writes:
>>I tend to feel the same way.  "Need" implies (to me, anyway) a *lack* of
>>something.  I'd rather feel that I'm spending time with someone (and he
>>with me) because we *want* to be together, and that we add something to
>>each others lives.
>
>I also feel this way, but was counseled by several people during the ...
> (stuff deleted)
>
>In my mind, need equates with dependency/codependency.  Mutual want/desire 
>is ignites the passion in a relationship.
>
i hope this doesn't muddy the waters too much, but it seems to me that there's
this equation of the word "need" with things like "codependency" (one of the
current favourite buzzwords in psychology), and some general weakness of 
character, etc. is this really sound? i mean, it seems like the word "need"
is what people are most worried about, rather than what is actually happening
at the personal level. surely it would be okay to say that you need something
or someone, as long as the underlying meaning is not that you feel you
couldn't survive (etc) without it or them. eh?

as usual, i am acting as the official mouthpiece of the catholic church.
From: wjb@moscom.UUCP (Bill de Beaubien)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Date: 26 Aug 92 20:03:41 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford, NY
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Donald Fair (dfair@octel.com) wrote:
: 	Sorry, Nancy, but the current laws don't allow a man to get
: 	a divorce just because a woman will not get a job.
: 	However, these are grounds for a woman to leave a man.

Um... welcome to the age of no-fault divorce.  You don't need a reason
any more.  I'll grant the possibility that a woman divorcing for this
reason might stand a better chance than a man of getting money out of
the settlement, but I've never looked at the statistics... but there
isn't any law that says this has to be the case either.  Not unless you've
got some strange laws out California way :-)
-- 
"Bless me, Father; I ate a lizard."
"Was it an abstinence day, and was it artificially prepared?"
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bill de Beaubien / wjb@moscom.com 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: dbj@cs.washington.edu (Dave Johnson)
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 22:33:40 GMT

In article <thurlow.714947552@convex.convex.com> thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes:
>In <BRUCE.92Aug26161342@suprenum.supr.scm.liv.ac.uk> bruce@supr.scm.liv.ac.uk (Bruce Stephens) writes:
>>> 	
>>> 	Hmmmm.....maybe I'll come after all!:>
>
>>I'm sure... No, I just can't bring myself to say it.
>
>C'mon Bruce, how are you going to learn to hunt if you can't make an
>easy kill like this one?  I mean, the punch line is begging you to
>take it and use it.
>
>Skilled posters don't waste great straight lines :-)

Truly skilled posters don't waste their time on the easy ones.

Whoops, looks like another straight line....
-- 
  Dave Johnson

"You're not too smart, are you?  I like that in a man."
    --Kathleen Turner in Body Heat 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle)
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 06:47:06 GMT

diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:

>kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>>(c)  You are welcome to come over for dinner anytime.  Do try and give
>>me a couple days notice so's I can fire up the stockpot and pick the
>>raspberries.

>Yum.  Cool.  (Be careful, I may actually take you up on this.  I didn't
>see a smiley)!

That's cuz I didn't put one in.

The raspberry season is ending soon, but the tomatoes are still good.
As is the basil.  Sweet corn is almost gone, and most of our usually
wonderful peach crop was killed by cold last spring.

>>I think most people deserve what they get. 
>>(Some people, of course, aren't getting any.)

>Does that mean that's what we deserve?  What an ugly thought. :-)

*laugh* Naw, it means waggish people can't accuse _you_ of getting
what you deserve.

-- 
"The truffle is not an outright aphrodisiac, but it may in certain
 circumstances make women more affectionate and men more amiable."
 ..................................................Brillat-Savarin
-- 
Kiran Wagle     <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>     (812) 335-0420
From: jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Sucking Up
Date: 3 Sep 92 20:33:53 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

enigma@halcyon.com (Matt Luders) writes:

[suckup and commentary deleted]

>**explanation*
>Stef, you know perfectly *well* that the quote was originally about Helen of
>Troy, the most beautiful woman in Greece.  It wasn't easy finding a decent
>quote with the word "suck" in it. :-)

Not true. Have you forgotten the most-recited poem in the English language?
The one about the man from Nantucket?
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Aloysius McVeigh | "As an advocate of reason, egoism and capitalism,
jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu  |  I seek to reach the men of the intellect - wherever
      "N.I.N.A."        |  such may still be found."                [Ayn Rand]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: snoopy@sopwith.uucp (Snoopy)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: pizza and chocolate and cheese - oh my!
Date: 25 Aug 92 23:28:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: sopwith.1992Aug25.232822.17354
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Daisy Hill Puppy Farm

In article <1992Aug24.121445.1172@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> hymowitz@whatever.cs.jhu.edu (Hymie!) writes:

| can anyone suggest an aphrodisiac other than the 'big three' for those
| of us unable to enjoy the finer (i.e. dairy) things in life?

Well, pizza is the best, but Henry the K says power.

    _____
   /_____\   Snoopy			
  /_______\   
    |___|    cse.ogi.edu!sopwith!snoopy
    |___|    {ares,illian,loop,parsely,qiclab,sequent,techbook}!sopwith!snoopy
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: dbj@cs.washington.edu (Dave Johnson)
Subject: Re: DEFORMITIES AND PERVE
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 22:27:28 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.190340.5454@wetware.com> diana@wetware.com (CatWoman ) writes:
>
>My take on it when I have sat and tried to analyze what
>I find "attractive" is that I don't have any specific
>"type", per-se.  What I do have is a set of physical 
>characteristics that will attract my attention when I
>see someone for the first time - Tall, long hair, slender,
>moustache, deep eyes.  Any of these characteristics will
>get my attention - the more there are, the more attention
>I will give the guy.

So a guy with three mustaches and eight deep eyes would
have you all over him?
-- 
  Dave Johnson

"You're not too smart, are you?  I like that in a man."
    --Kathleen Turner in Body Heat