HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: richwing@leland.Stanford.EDU (Rich Wingerter)
Subject: Re: Nice Guys (noooooooo!)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 04:56:51 GMT

In article <5461@news.duke.edu>, diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
|> Okay, all you Nice Guys[tm] out there who ever had a woman tell you 
|> "Gee, you're such a nice person and I'm sure someone will want to settle
|> down and have three kids with you, but I have a date to try out Ron's
|> new motorcycle tonight", now's your chance to strike a blow for a brother.
|> 
|> I'm being pursued (in a Nice way, of course) by a guy with a really 
|> CLASSIC case of the disorder.  My question is this: what's the least 
|> unpleasant and most helpful way to turn such a person down?

Find a Nice Girl (say, in Chapel Hill) and fix him up.


--Rich Wingerter
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Re: Does anyone understand?
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 05:47:26 GMT

In article 28791@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu, stan@astro.ocis.temple.edu (Stan Horwitz) writes:
>Andreas  Tovornik (atovorni@engr.UVic.CA) wrote:
 
>:    Yes, the same thing happened to me. I stopped being aggressive about
>: the whole advance thing, and things work better now. Play hard to get,and
>: likely women will try harder to get you.
>:    It appears that people want something only when they know they can't 
>: have it.

>I think there's a more fundamental problem involved here. Most women are 
>nuts. That's all. It seems that every female I meet thinks I'me a great guy,
>but won't go out with me because she's hooked on some do nothing, go nowhere
>loser. Not that I'me better than anyone else, but I am a hell of a lot better
>than many guys I know at treating a lady, the trouble is that there aren't
>too many lady's out there who are sane enough to see a good opportunity
>and take it when the opportunity presents himself.

Aw Stan, don't you know women need a challenge? don't you know that you
have to be a mean macho jerk to attract women? If you're a nice guy [Tm]
forget it. Everybody knows that...Guess that's why I'm still not chained
down. I don't play asinine games anymore.

>This statement comes from my personal experience and that of many friends,
>both male and female. Maybe I'me being foolish, but perhaps one day, one
>of the few sane females and I will happen to meet and hit it off in a
>very special way, but it hasn't happened thus far.

Now you're generalising, buddy. This is just because the sane ones don't
lick the floor you step on. Ever hear of Eddie Wrong?

I strongly encourage all you ladies to flame me!

Andy.
  
PLEASE EXCUSE MY OBVIOUS IGNORANCE.

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: dating service for single scientists?
Date: 26 Sep 1992 06:58:05 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine

In article <1992Sep23.194345.7360@ALEX.ims.bellcore.com> Peter Clitherow <pc@breeze.bellcore.com> writes:
>
>
>i friend of mine heard a rumour that there's a dating service for single
>scientists, and she'd like to find out more.  could anyone with
>information email me, and i'll forward...tnx,

Yes, it's called "Silicon Valley".  She'll do just fine here.

		-ed falk, sun microsystems
		 sun!falk, falk@sun.com
	"Towards the end, the smell of their air began to change"
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: shannah@netcom.com (Teri Miller)
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 07:26:07 GMT

In article <1ade6cINN688@golem.wcc.govt.nz> parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>In article <1992Sep30.192453.1951@cbnews.cb.att.com>, eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (eleanor.j.evans) writes:
>
>>>     a product called "Teen Talk Barbie" which says 4 phrases.  One of the 
>>>     phrases is "Math class is hard".  I can't imagine a product better
>>>     designed to program math avoidance into little girls.  We've all heard
>
>
>Is is just a coincidence that Barbie is a blonde?
>
Of course not, dear.  Everyone knows that being blonde automatically
makes one an idiot.  Just as all redheads have nasty tempers.

There *are* some compensations, though - we blondes often have dates
while our more intellectually blessed sisters (mousey browns, one and
all) are sitting at home alone pondering the intricacies of the universe.

Gag.

You know, Supergoof, I have seen you post some really inane stuff, but
I think this takes the cake.  Do you think these up all by yourself?
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 2 Oct 92 14:52:18 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <w4=p90j@lynx.unm.edu> hays@TECHNET.NM.ORG writes:
>In article <5683@news.duke.edu>, diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>
>>ANYWAY.  Anyone out there got any good techniques for soliciting backrubs
>>from total strangers?  

>You might try coming to the balloonboink. . .
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Larry 'Purple' Hays                                      hays@technet.nm.org
>                         Bananas AND backrubs?????

I'd love to... but I'm impoverished and overworked, and just too far away.
I guess it's one of life's little ironies that the factors likely to be
producing my stress (poverty, isolation, and work) are keeping me from
meeting clusters of people who could help with my stress-induced
backaches!


				--Diamond

diamond@acpub.duke.edu |   Let your mind go and your body will follow.
Elizabeth S. Abrams    |
From: ac@cheshire.oxy.edu (Aileen Cho)
Subject: relationship gone to pot?
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 02:36:59 GMT


   Okay bear with me, I've just barely joined this group. I would like to
know how people have dealt with relationships (or attempts at) with others
who are potheads. I got the distinct feeling in my last crash-and-burn affair
that I lost out to the weed. I suppose it was more reliable.  My friend also
had a thing going that lasted a little longer than mine, but in the end that
also burned out as pot took over.
   Don't get me wrong, I'm not against pot per se (it's certainly no wore
worse than cigarettes), it's just that when somebody you wanted to be with
gets stoned every day (once things get a little difficult with the relation-
ship), you get rather frustrated.
   Any advice? (Besides not getting involved again with someone addicted to
pot).
                                      --ac
From: taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Book Rec.: _Bodies: Overcoming the Tyranny of Perfection_
Date: 4 Oct 92 20:08:40 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki, Finland

In <1akh5oINN178@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:

>Emma writes about Trygve:
>>Nonono! You are definitely perfect!  Join the club!:)

>In article <29354@hydra.Helsinki.FI> taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina) writes:
>>Perfect people are boring.

>Boring is an imperfection.  Therefore, perfect people are never boring.

Strictly speaking you are right, but that's not what I meant.

I've been wondering what kind of person is perfect.  I took an
egoistic approach and thought a person that would be perfect for me.
After some interesting thoughs I got the conclusion that in order to
be perfect all the time she would have to read my mind, know
practically everything about me and be able to reflect my moods in a
random way so that I wouldn't be bored to that either.  But, I
wouldn't want such a friend, and fortunately they are nonexistent too.
Nobody is perfect...

What I find boring are people that are often considered perfect.
Would you consider a person that is soo complete interesting?  I would
be facinated at her/him some time, but sooner or later I would think
that this person is just too damn flawless.  It's our little flaws
that make people interesting.

Juha
-- 
Juha Taina | taina@cs.helsinki.fi | Phone: +358-0-708-4247
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle)
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 20:01:47 GMT

blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:

>Excuse me? What did humans evolve from, Newts?

No silly.  We evolved from Amphioxus.  Haven't you heard the song?

(To the tune of that song about Tipperary.)

It's a long way from amphioxus / it's a long way to us
It's a long way from amphioxus / to the meanest human cuss
Goodbye to fins and gill slits / hello lungs and hair
It's a long long way from amphioxus / but we all came from there

Now.  Any more questions?

-- 
"Young Archi-Mollusks went to sea with nothing but a vellum--
 A sort of autocycling hoop, instead of pram--to wheel 'em;
 And spinning round, they one by one acquired parental features,
 A shell above, a foot below--the queerest little creatures.

 From "The Ballad of the Veliger, or How the Gastropod got its Twist" 
 in _Larval Forms and other Zoological Verses_ by Walter Garstang.
-- 

Kiran Wagle                           <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
From: jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Engaged Psychobitch from Hell Syndrome
Date: 5 Oct 92 19:44:37 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
>>      Oh I see!  So, there's no point in making a "serious commitment"
>>in any average relationship because the person in question has only a one
>>in 5 billion chance of being perfect for you so therefore it's not
>>worth bothering?

markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>Actually the probabiliy of someone being a perfect match is more like 1/1000
>or so.  Probably even a lot more, like 1/100.
>
>Really, I'd say 1/1000, because then the probability of finding two perfect
>matches at once would be like 1/1000000, which makes the event about as common
>as observation suggests. :)

It appears that both of you are assuming the existence of a "perfect match". I
would qualify this by saying that there's a "best match" which may or may not
be perfect. As a cynic, I'm not a big believer in perfection.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Aloysius McVeigh | "What do you want? Perfection?"
   jm0i@.Lehigh.edu     | "- or nothing. So you see, I take the nothing." (AR)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Keywords: lime pie
Date: 26 Sep 92 16:22:21 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <1992Sep25.184047.1990@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>Let's think for just a moment here--I've been dumped at least my share
>of times and every time it's been for someone who had much less money
....
> 
>Now, what can we conclude from this?

That you should start dating gold-diggers?  :-)

-- 
Steve Swann                 |    Speak to me in many voices; make
swann@acsu.buffalo.edu      |      them all sound like one...  -BOC
From: jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: I have been absent for a few days...
Date: 1 Oct 92 15:59:54 GMT
Organization: Bear, Stearns & Co. - FAST


Greetings folks...

    I have unfortunately been absent for a few days, due to the Jewish
high holidays, an upcoming deadline, and a major (read: permanent) spat
with my girlfriend. :-( :-( :-(

    I have received email from a few of you, and want to let you all
know that I have read it, but I might not be able to get back to you
for a few days (after I catch up)...

    Hopefully, no unread news will expire before I get back...

    					Later...

						Spidey!!!
   






--
 /\ \  / /\  Josh Diamond                                          jmd@bear.com
//\\ .. //\\ AKA Spidey!!!                        ...!ctr.columbia.edu!ursa!jmd
//\((  ))/\\
/  < `' >  \                                              Do whatever it takes.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: The Engaged Psychobitch from Hell Syndrome
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 02:23:23 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
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 <90413@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:

>Anyone else out there planning on waiting until marriage before they
>have sex, and then sleeping only with their spouse thereafter?  Or
>am I too hopeless an anachronism for this group?

You're indeed a hopeless anachronism, but welcome anyway :-)  My last
girlfriend believed for both religious and emotional reasons to wait
until marriage to have sex.  Knowing her in the non-Biblical sense
was quite enlightening to me, who tended to hold to the "test drive"
theory before.  Karen was very warm and by no means had any impairment
in her sex drive, and from our cuddling it was always quite apparent
that sex would be wonderful with her.  I came to believe that I could
marry someone without trying sex first without having to worry that
the sex might not work, and I felt better upon discovering that.  So,
while it's not my first choice, it's now an acceptable option for me.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, Networking Technical Leader
Convex Computer Corporation, Richardson, TX
(214) 497-4405
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Subject: Re: Marriage
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 17:17:53 GMT


>In article <BvB9Au.uo@inews.Intel.COM>, gbennett@frx781.intel.com (gbennett) writes:
>|>    Would you be willing to give up a career, a new home, and a new car
>|>    for an everlasting and loving marriage?


	If he was a rich man!:)  (Then I wouldn't have to worry because
	I'd be trading them for an even better set! *GRIN*)
From: puter@no1home.nashvil.ingr.com (PuterDude)
Subject: Re: new p-size war for singles (Re: How long has it been?)
Followup-To: misc.test
Organization: Never!
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 20:44:41 GMT

Seen in talk.bizarre...

In article <1992Oct6.152803.18784@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mneeley@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark Neeley) writes:
>In article <1992Oct6.134605.16183@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
>I post bait to soc.singles,alt.romance,alt.romance.chat:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>How long has it been since you were kissed by a member of
>>the opposite sex?
>>
>>	Mark (almost a year)
>
>	Mark (I didn't take the SAT's)

Nerd alert!!!

-- 

Puter	puter@no1home.nashvil.ingr.com
And you thought there was something here to read...
From: mlb@CISCO.COM (Marcia Bednarcyk)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Marriage
Date: 29 Sep 92 22:15:45 GMT

In article <BvB9Au.uo@inews.Intel.COM>, gbennett@frx781.intel.com (gbennett) writes:
|>    Would you be willing to give up a career, a new home, and a new car
|>    for an everlasting and loving marriage?

Would I be willing to compromise some things? You betcha.

Would I be willing to give up everything? No.

If I were in a position to be thinking about marrying, I would be going into
it as a whole person, theoretically joining my life with another whole person,
and retaining who I am while becoming part of a couple. That doesn't mean the
old me gets lost, or is discarded, or that the things that were once important
to me are no longer important. Changes happen, and things change over time,
but that base is still there.

For me, my career is important. I have put a lot of time and energy into it,
and while a marriage is also important, it is not enough to just toss all that
time. Change focus and compromise, yet. Discard, no.

I would not ask someone to sacrifice everything for me, either.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcia Bednarcyk                                        ADDRESS: mlb@cisco.com
"Sweaty Snugglebunnies."
"... the meaning of life is to be happy, try not to hurt people, and hope
you fall in love."
From: gds@LA.TIS.COM (Greg Skinner)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:40:50 GMT
Organization: Trusted Information Systems, Inc., Los Angeles, CA

In article <1992Sep29.175452.17220@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> Nancy Colucci writes:
>My friend John belongs to a computer dating service and every month or
>so has a date with a woman who "requests" him (he's no longer active in
>the service but he's on file to be "picked from").  A few times ago I asked
>him how a date went and he said he wasn't interested in dating her
>again because she was "fat."

Hmmm.  I would think that someone would get to know someone first, and
find out if they're interested in athletics, rather than just writing
them off if they don't look like they're interested in athletics.  For
example, someone with that attitude who doesn't follow pro football
might see the "Fridge" walking down the street, and wrongly assume
that he isn't into athletics.

But, as they say, your mileage may vary.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: daniel@clsi.COM (Daniel Barclay)
Subject: Re: boys in their thirties who never dated
Organization: CAD Language Systems Inc.
	<ewright.717696345@convex.convex.com>
	<1992Sep28.183534.19300@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
Distribution: na
Date: 29 Sep 92 10:44:18


>> Father Edward shall smote the deamons.
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^
I believe the conjugation is "shall smite".


>> Smote thine enemies.
   ^^^^^
I believe the conjugation is "Smite".


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: goodrum@unccsun.uncc.edu (Cloyd Goodrum)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: University of NC at Charlotte
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 03:35:56 GMT

In article <MARTINC.92Sep25224245@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>self-esteem is significantly hindered by my lack of physical acumen?
>
>Just for the record: I'm not only good-looking, I'm smart.
>--

	Me too!! And plus, I'm humble!



cloyd
From: jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: E.W. - Classic Mediaeval Quote re: the Women love Jerks syndrome!
Date: 25 Sep 92 16:30:06 GMT
Organization: Bear, Stearns & Co. - FAST
In-reply-to: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie's message of 24 Sep 92 10:53:23 GMT


In article <ewillims.717332003@unix1.tcd.ie> ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:

	   "it is true that the more one begs and praises a woman,
	    the more contemptuous she becomes; but the man who
	    shames and mistreats her often finds her more 
	    compliant for it."

I never cease to find evidence that "human civilization" is an
oxymoron.

Spidey!!!



--
 /\ \  / /\  Josh Diamond                                          jmd@bear.com
//\\ .. //\\ AKA Spidey!!!                        ...!ctr.columbia.edu!ursa!jmd
//\((  ))/\\
/  < `' >  \                                              Do whatever it takes.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: Philly Boink Announcement
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 13:20:30 GMT

In article <1992Sep25.220216.17947@fid.morgan.com> sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
>In article <1992Sep24.125737.4381@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
>jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep23.224744.20129@linus.mitre.org> wtr@mitre.org (Bill Ralston) writes:
>>> >If there was a possibility of a poker game(couple hours) I might
>>> >splurge on a babysitter and plane fare. Of course I'd need lodging.
>>> >Just as friends you understand.
>>>
>>>Bring as much money as you can afford to lose (and your seesters).
>>
>> HaaawooooooOOOOO baby(rubbing palms together till they smoke).
>> I don't like to loose more'n a couple hundred.
>> Same ballpark?
>
>No problem with the money, but I don't have any seesters.
>Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
 
 In the interest's of all fairness we can arbitrarily dictate that some
stranger(preferable a girl) be your seester.
 Then we can all hit up on her.

 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Marriage
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 21:21:33 GMT

In article <BvB9Au.uo@inews.Intel.COM> gbennett@frx781.intel.com
(gbennett) writes:
>
>I would like to pose a hypothetical question to any single willing to
>respond.  Here it is:
>
>   Would you be willing to give up a career, a new home, and a new car
>   for an everlasting and loving marriage?

Well, a few years ago I was willing to move to the midwest to be with
the woman I loved (since she hated NYC).  That would have involved
giving up my job and my new (well, about 2-years-old to me) co-op.
Being a New Yorker, I've never had a car.

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Ipisissimus
From: wall@hel4.brl.mil (Jeff Wall)
Date: 5 Oct 92 16:12:51 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: U.S. Army Human Engineering Lab  Aberdeen, MD

In article <1992Oct5.131620.18504@cbfsb.cb.att.com> jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com
(james.j.dutton) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.150358.22636@beaver.cs.washington.edu>
dbj@cs.washington.edu (Dave Johnson) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct2.123956.11914@cbfsb.cb.att.com> jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com
(james.j.dutton) writes:
>>> Ipisissimus of the Inner Order of Sesquipedalian Fruitcakes - IIOSF XOX
Dawn
>>  ^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>  Where does he get those wonderful words?
>
>Well that particular one was sent to me as a little present. From an old
>friend. OK. From someone a little more then a friend. OK. From an intimate
>acquintance. OK. From a hot toe tapping goddess of love. OK. From the
>sexual as well as intellectual be all of end all's. OK. From the very being
>of my pores, the essence of all thats pure and good, the whammer of
>my jammer and I ain't talking Hammer.
> 
>Actually Dawn sent it to me. I've never met her.
>  
>===============================================================================
=
> Ipisissimus of the Inner Order of Sesquipedalian Fruitcakes - IIOSF XOX Dawn
> Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
>===============================================================================
=

My Websters 9th doesn't have this word :-(. What does it mean??  The closest I
have found is:  ipsissima verba - the exact language used by someone quoted
(the selfsame words)

That makes James sig translate to:  The selfsome words of the Inner Order of
[those] given to or characterized by the use of long words [something about] a
rich cake containing nuts, dried or candied fruits and spices.

Sounds like some sort of mysterious cult.  How do you join????

Jeff Wall
wall@hel4.brl.mil
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: lindsay@green.cs.wisc.edu (Joe Lindsay)
Subject: Re: What I find attractive ?
Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 04:17:14 GMT

rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:

>though.  For instance, I am rarely attracted to women who are involved with
>someone else.

What's your secret?  >90% of those I have been attracted to in the past have
been involved w/someone else. 

-- 
Joseph C. Lindsay, III - "Wouldn't you like to be a fraction, too?"