HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: steveb@cernvax.cern.ch (Steve Bougerolle)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Cold Showers
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:24:31 GMT
Organization: CERN, Geneva, Switzerland

No, I don't mean the cold showers I took when my neighbours were having
noisy sex and making it impossible to concentrate on my book.

I don't mean rain.

I mean otherwise normal shower stalls which never seem to have any hot
water at the times you need it.  You know, in the morning you stumble
out of bed, turn the water on, stick your hand in till it feels warm, then
get in.  Then you scream and shout as you suddenly realise your hand felt
warm not because the water was warm, but because the blood temperature in
your hand had dropped below the threshold of feeling.

This is the major problem with living in a dormitory.

Anti-Peeve:  It only costs 6 or 8 Francs a night, which for Geneva is a
positively astronomical bargain.

Double-plus-anti-peeve:  I'm outta here on Monday, FOREVER!!!!!

     (ok, well maybe not forever but close enough)

Peeve:  It appears I never will find out what ultimately happened to R.

Peeve:  I'm booked on a "flight from hell," Geneva->London->Seattle->
Vancouver on British Airways.

Extra-peeve:  The flight goes through Heathrow, not Gatwick.

Minor consolation anti-peeve:  It could have been with an (ugh ugh ugh)
American airline.

(Anti-?) Peeve:  There's a good chance this flight will be on a 747.  This
would be a definite peeve except for the high probability that almost
everyone will get off in Seattle and I won't have to compete with 300 people
in the luggage lineup.

Related Peeve:  Excess baggage charges.

Related major anti-peeve:  I get to stop in London for four hours.  That's
enough time for a few pints of good beer and maybe a steak & kidney pie.

Obweirdness:  I never have understood how English food got such a bad
reputation.  I like meat & potatoes, myself, at least every once in a while.

'nother peeve:  Just a few days ago rec.travel.air finally appeared, and
the first ongoing thread in the group is a series of plane travel horror
stories.

Minor flight anti-peeve:  By deliberate planning I just happen to have my
camera, lenses, binoculars, and "Houghton-Mifflin field guide to airplanes"
in my carry-on.  These will make the stop in Heathrow more interesting.

-- 
_|\ |V| /|_  Steve Bougerolle, U. of British Columbia Physics Dept.
\  \| |/  /   and the OPAL experiment, CERN, Geneva CH
 >_______<    STEVEB@CERNVAX.UUCP  STEVEB@CERNVM.CERN.CH
     !        STEVEB@CERNVM.BITNET  45397::STEVEB (HEPnet)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves,soc.singles,talk.bizarre
From: Ben Fulton <fulton@copper.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: what should I do?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 08:28:35 -0500

In <1992Apr7.100248.24792@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:

>Friday I ran into a young lady and asked her for some midol.

>the following monday she ran into me and I was complaining
>about water weight, feling bloated, and being generally crabby.

>Is this something a guy should worry about?

Depends how old you are, I guess.

ben
fulton@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
right here, right now
there is no other place I'd rather be!
From: geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Smoking Surrogate
Date: 9 Apr 92 15:33:11 GMT
Followup-To: alt.peeves
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Menlo Park, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: purplehaze.corp.sun.com



In article <1992Apr9.065007.16316@news.iastate.edu> z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu 
(Dan Sorenson -- Iowegian) writes:

>	I think it is high time some GIF's were posted to this group,
>specifically JZ, drew, Geoff, and the rest of those Californicators
>who spend inordinate amounts of time making me laugh.

Why not?  Let's all dig up pictures of ourselves and find out who has
access to a scanner.


>	No, really!  Geoff is 6'2"??!?!?!  I would have thought him to
>be a 5'8" 155lbs compu-geek with a slightly balding pate and a full
>"Unix-guru (tm)" beard, with hair slightly past the collar but not so
>long as to be an inconvenience and blowing into his face.  

No, I don't work in MTV14. :)


>	Anyway, what is the concensus?


Let's do it!



JZ


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller                    + + + + + + + +        Sun Microsystems
geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM  + + + + + + + +     Menlo Park, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
From: egev05@castle.ed.ac.uk (B A Page)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Psychology (was: Re: Lawyers not Chemists)
Keywords: *WARNING* Psychobable Ranting
Date: 14 Apr 92 16:56:32 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

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

>Agreed. There's nothing more annoying than working a peevesome summer job
>during college (my own summers working in a quahog packaging factory springs
>to mind) and having people asking you what you're studying:
>	Worker Dude: Hey, college kid, whatcha studyin'?
>        Foolish Dan: Psychology.
>        Worker Dude: Whoa! Hey, look out for this kid, he's gonna
>                     psychoanalyze all of us!!!
>Eventually, you learn to lie:
>        Worker Dude: Hey, college kid, whatcha studyin'?
>          Wiser Dan: Molecular biophysics.
>        Worker Dude: Oh.
This reminds me of my summer job packing shelves for Marks and Spencer
(in High Wycombe, South Bucks Town From Hell).  When asked where I was
at college, I naively replied Cambridge once and the baffled/hostile
looks convinced me to suddenly change the path of my career and be a
dropout from Wycombe College.  When asked what I studied I said Geology
a number of times but eventually realised that it wasn't worth trying to
explain that no, I didn't dig up bones and no, I didn't watch that
fascinating programme about Ancient Egypt the other day.  No it wasn't
right up my street.  

ObMegaPeeve;  our fucked-up clueless society whereby middle class kids
are shunned by their peers for doing well at school.  For fucks sake,
there's more to life than living in High Wycombe, driving a souped up
Escort, and working as a brickie/receptionist (when the recession isn't
too bad).

!Peeve;  not bowing to strong social pressure to do badly at school and
glowing at the thought of those poor sods who decided to be brickies and
are now out of work because they voted for the tories 

Peevetown contest:  Count the sweeping generalisations in the above
post.

Babs!
From: DAVID.BUSHONG@OFFICE.WANG.COM ("Dave Bushong")
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: I'll be honest with you.
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:37:53 GMT
Organization: Mail to News Gateway

Why is it that when you're in a meeting, and someone begins a sentence
with "I'll be honest with you" -- they AREN'T????!  Does that also mean
that the rest of the time they won't be honest with you?  Well?

=========================================================================
                         We'll miss you, Sam.
=========================================================================
From: geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Lemon Gin, Rape
Date: 9 Apr 92 01:40:40 GMT
Followup-To: alt.peeves
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Menlo Park, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: purplehaze.corp.sun.com


In article <1992Apr8.220641.15354@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU> allane@moon.gas.unsw.OZ.AU.gas.unsw.OZ.AU (Allan Evans) writes:

>> Is it true that the Stones' song "Five Into One" is about the band's 
>> relationship with Margaret Trudeau?
>                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>Probably true, but you're showing your age. Brian Mulroney and his wife Mila
>have been living it up in Ottawa since 1984 (however this may change...).

I didn't say Trudeau was *still in power,* fer cryin' out loud!  Mother
of sweating Jesus!  I know about Bill the Conqueror, too, (Norman, is that
you?), but I've never been accused of being around since 1066 because of
that!


>Remember? I'd much rather wake up to Margaret Trudeau or Mila Mulroney giving
>me head than Barbara Bush. Although there are always gums....

No argument.  The first time I saw a photo of Barbara Bush, I thought she
was George's *mother.*


Geoff


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller                    + + + + + + + +        Sun Microsystems
geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM  + + + + + + + +     Menlo Park, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Xref: sparky alt.peeves:7590 alt.good.news:440
From: pwg@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Goldberg)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves,alt.good.news
Subject: Re: Recession anti-peeves
Date: 6 Apr 92 14:01:46 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh

In article <19823@castle.ed.ac.uk>, fofp@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Holmes) writes:

      [...]
> >So re-elect Major! Re-elect Bush! Lets let this recession run and run!
      [...]
> They're gonna plough a billion into the economy to "kick-start" it.
> Great thinking Batman. A billion huh? Lesse, six billion got wiped off
> the stockmarket in one day when the Polls went Labour's way. That wasn't
> even considered very peeveworthy as stockmarket falls go.

Of course not. I expect that if Labour get in, the stockmarket will lose
a few billions, but after a while they'll calm down and have a cup of tea,
and decide that thing's aren't so bad after all, and they can safely claim
to be worth more again. The stockmarket's ability to create and annihilate
money certainly puts the Royal Mint to shame.

> The real fall
> will be on Friday most likely. And where does the Billion come from? Out
> of people's pockets. I.e. out of the economy. So, they're gonna take a
> billion that people might spend on something they want,

Ahh, they'd only go and waste it on sweeties and lollipops (or some adult
equivalent). Gotta look after these people you know, they can't look after
themselves.

> take a cut for the bureacrats,

No problem there. The bureaucrats will spend it in due course, thus
returning the money to the economy. And since they're probably Oxbridge-
educated civil servants, they can be relied on not to waste it.

> then put what's left to buying stuff that they figure
> people oughta want even if they don't: "Like which failing industry
> should we prop up this week?".

Well, the workers' pay cheques will all return to the economy when they
go out to spend their ill-gotten gains. Anyway, don't you feel there's
something rather noble and glorious about a last-ditch struggle to keep
some great traditional industry alive? The beauty of a stag at bay, so
to speak.

> The 70's has already proved that this plan can't fail to keep a good
> recession going.

Of course, Labour's got a job on it's hands to rebuild the shattered
morale of the unions before 70s conditions can be satisfactorily
restored. After 13 years under the jackboot of Thatcherism, they might
lack the confidence for a while to strike at the drop of a hat for better
pay.

      [more stuff deleted]

Obpeeve: After unburdening myself of all that bullshit, I look up and
and half expect myself to be in a poorly-lit, noisy, crowded room,
breathing a fog of cigarette smoke and with a pint of brown liquid at
my side. Instead, the sterile atmosphere of a terminal room reproachfully
meets my gaze.


yours peevishly,
Paul.

"In this way a better economy will be created not on the basis of hard
work but on the basis of following Natural Law, which works through the
Principle of Least Action (Physics) - maximum accomplishment through
minimum effort on the basis of infinite creativity."
  - from the manifesto of the Natural Law Party, April 1992
From: Not_Al_Crawford@ed.ac.uk (Not Al Crawford)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Lemon, Gin, Rape
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:31:27 GMT
Reply-To: Not_Al_Crawford@ed.ac.uk (Not Al Crawford)
Distribution: alt
Organization: Penicuik People's Revolutionary Sheepdog Liberation Front

And lo, geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller) spake unto the masses saying:
>
> No argument.  The first time I saw a photo of Barbara Bush, I thought she
> was George's *mother.*

You mean she *isn't?* Damn, another illusion shattered. Next thing you'll
be telling me that little Danny isn't his son...

--
		Not Al Crawford - Not_Al_Crawford@ed.ac.uk
 "Isn't it nice/Sugar and spice/Luring disco sheepdogs/To a life of vice."
From: carolo@cse.ucsc.edu (Carol Osterbrock)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Smoking Surrogate
Date: 8 Apr 92 17:02:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.32377
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz (CE/CIS Boards)

In article <blah blah> banta@gilia.Eng.Sun.COM ("Buns")(242 lbs before cooking) writes:

>(Jenni "Shorts Season" Sheehey) writes:
>>ObWierdness: Really fat people who wear shorts on the first day the
>>temperature goes over 60F.  If I weighed, say, 250 lbs, I sure wouldn't
>>be rushing the shorts season.  However, I've seen probably four of them
>>today in shorts, and they were all female.  Go figure.

>There are people on this list that can testify that I've been seen
>wandering the beach area of Santa Cruz in January at midnight in
>shorts.  Tie-dyed shorts.  I didn't feel wierd.

This is true.  I am one of those people.  However, wearing tie-died
shorts in Santa Cruz in January is not weird.  Wherever PSU is, it
is definitely east of here, and they have different ideas about proper
attire there, dood.

Peeve: lukewarm hot tubs.

-carol





-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Carol Osterbrock       *       Such a long, long time to be gone
carolo@cse.ucsc.edu    *         And a short time to be there...
===============================================================================
From: steveb@cernvax.cern.ch (Steve Bougerolle)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Demographics again
Date: 9 Apr 92 09:28:09 GMT
Organization: CERN, Geneva, Switzerland

In <ku7nukINNait@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> banta@blagg.Eng.Sun.COM (242 lbs before cooking) writes:

>I'm 6'6", son.  Just because Geoff Miller is 6'2" and you look up to
>him, don't assume that's true of everyone you look up to.

Hm.. I'm 193 cm (6'4").  Bandy is tall, too, isn't he?  There's a trend here,
I bet.

Being tall is very peeve-inducing at times.  Everything you do is magnified.
That's what I find, anyway.  If I just sit around looking casual and
unconcerned somehow I seem a pillar of confidence and little old women will
pick me out of a crowd of people to ask for directions, even though I'm a
complete foreigner and have no fucking idea where anything is.

Other people can get away with being angry and shouting.  Not me, that would
cause people to be terrified and run away like small mice.

And then there are the human rabbits that Geoff peeved about, the ones that
run away from you merely because you're tall.  Fortunately I don't meet many
of them.

Short people have to be THE most peevesome of all, though.  What is it about
these shrimps that they can't handle those of us who are tall?  If some
short guy gets drunk and wants to cause trouble, who is he going to pick to
try to start a fight?  Me, of course.  When I walk down the street and some
peewee wants to assert his manliness, who is he going to play chicken with?
Me, of course.

Being much taller than almost all women is troublesome at times, too.

Being tall does have a few anti-peeves, though.  If you're nice that
magnification effect works just as well, which is good for meeting females.

Nobody ever tries to mug me.  (Well, ok, some goofball sort of tried in
Barcelona but he didn't succeed.  He must have been nuts).

I can get away with crazy things other people wouldn't dream of.  Like the
time in Glasgow I encountered a bunch of skinheads wandering down the side-
walk and scattered them like bowling pins.  I did the same thing in Vancouver
with a couple Leather Boys who went out of their way to get in my way.

Yeh, on balance I think I'm happy being tall.

						  -Steve
-- 
_|\ |V| /|_  Steve Bougerolle, U. of British Columbia Physics Dept.
\  \| |/  /   and the OPAL experiment, CERN, Geneva CH
 >_______<    STEVEB@CERNVAX.UUCP  STEVEB@CERNVM.CERN.CH
     !        STEVEB@CERNVM.BITNET  45397::STEVEB (HEPnet)
From: sac@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Lawyers not Chemists
Date: 7 Apr 92 16:46:30 -0500

My wife and I went to a wedding last Saturday evening on a boat on the
intracostal waterway of Florida. The wedding was nice (certainly not
the $25K wedding MY goddess put on) but nice. All evening we floated slowly
by beautiful manicured homes both large and small; all owned by VERY rich
and powerful people or companies. Usually I would rant and rave about the 
inequality of wealth in these United States but there was an open bar and
large numbers of beautiful women so I thought a little social interaction and 
rug cutting would be lots more fun. It was. But suffice it to say I made a 
mental note to feel shitty about how unfairly poor I was in comparison to 
the top 1% of Americans at a later time. 

At the end of a quite pleasant and drunken evening, several of us took
several cabs to the home of one of us (not mine) for subsequent drinks
and a private billiards tournament. The home was the abode of an average
but not unknown shyster^H^H^H^H^H^H^H lawyer. He was two years younger than
I, and not to date myself, I still have a few years of my twenties yet to come.
He wasn't in practice for more than six years but he had a two bedroom house,
on the intracostal, with a sunken greecian bathtub in a bathroom as large as
my living/dining area, a two car garage filled with a 1992 ZR-1 Corvette
and a 1990? 944S Porche, the requisite hot tub, a cigarette racing boat,
a hand carved teak billiards table uncountable color tv sets and no wife
(maybe that hads some thing to do with it?). All the furniture was full
grain leather and the maid came thrice weekly to clean house. Now I went
to college also. I studied, no doubt, as hard as he; if not harder. I
painstakingly shoveled others people shit lab work for years to get my
coveted degrees. The only problem is that I am the only one who covets
them. Out of college my first position paid $20K per year. What the Fuck
is that? Most of my fraternity brothers who watched TV through collge
made more than that out of college! Now I must listen to my wife piss
at the mouth about how poor we are and what a shitty job I have and
how she is pulling the larger load (she makes more than I and we are NOT
poor by any stretch of the imagination). Now I don't blame her. We live
in an area of the country where there is beaucoup bucks, most of it old
and "..none of it yaws so remove your poloi from the decor, thang yuh!"

I ask you, where is the justice in this snot nosed ambulance chaser owning
more before he's thirty than I ever will in 30 years of hard core medical 
research? If you can prove to me he virtuously deserves all his perques
I will do just about anything in retribution.

Sorry for the monologue, but I have to get the crushing weight of a 
truely farcicle reality off my chest every once in a while

Sheesh!

Scott A. Chasse

ALMS! ALMS! ALMS!
A ha-penny for a wretched begger sir?
From: malc@pyramid.unr.edu (Malcolm L. Carlock)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Things my wife does (revisited)
Date: 8 Apr 92 06:30:59 GMT
Reply-To: malc@pyramid.unr.edu (Malcolm L. Carlock)
Organization: Xinaian Tourist Bureau

In article <ku12f2INN6l@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Tricky Gnosis) splutters:
>
>even if I think they're anal retentive fruitcakes.

Well.  If you can't be nice, then I'm just simply NOT going to stoop to
responding to that statement.  Hmph.

>Peeve:  The abbreviation "SO."  What say we all drop it and go back to
>boyfriend/girlfriend and husband/wife?

I dunno.. for one thing, it's much easier to write than the alternatives
you suggest, and it avoids the necessity of specifying boyfriend/girlfriend
husband/wife where such exactness is not only unnecessary but potentially
distracting from the point being made (e.g., in much of alt.sex).

If one is talking specifically about one's husband/wife, or boyfriend/
girlfriend, then the specific term is probably more appropriate.

ObPeeve:   Disappreciation of new terms that enrich a language (in this case
	   a new term which adds generality without loss of essential meaning.)

--
ObWeapon:  A silver-fulminate filled Santa Claus gnome thrown with great
	   force from a speeding car.
--
Malcolm L. Carlock                      Internet:  malc@unr.edu
                                        UUCP:      unr!malc
                                        BITNET:    malc@equinox
From: bls@sector7g.Eng.Sun.COM (Brian Scearce)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Gender assumptions
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:44:57 GMT
Reply-To: bls@sector7g.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: sector7g

In article 8544@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov, dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug S. Caprette Bldg. 28 > > > The "blame the victim" mentality upsets me to no end.

Please don't be angry at us.  Most of us are just pawns of the dominant
social mores, and can't help but adopt those attitudes as our own.

---
Brian Scearce                               bls@sector7g.eng.sun.com
        The above does not necessarily represent Sun policy.
  "Don't be surprised when a crack in the ice appears under your feet."
From: booter@Autodesk.COM (Elaine Richards)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Gender assumptions
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:18:32 GMT
Organization: Autodesk, Inc., Sausalito, CA

In article <1992Apr11.233551.4851@cs.brown.edu> cgy@cs.brown.edu (Curtis Yarvin) writes:
>alt-groups?), but IMHO it all boils down to one blatantly obvious fact: all
>men are nothing but huge walking dicks.  All we're good for is fucking;
>approach us for any other sort of intercourse, at your own risk.


That's not entirely true. Men are very good at opening jars that are
stuck.


Peeve: Jars that stick.

!Peeve: A good pair of pliers.

ObWeapon: Needlenose pliers.

ER



--
*"I mean it could make a big difference in your life if you thought that 
*you didn't need to depend on some musty old dogma thats riddled with
*translation problems, and started acting from the center of your own being."
*					-Owen Rowley