HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: The great fitness debate (was men in their thirties)
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 01:56:28 GMT

In article 28341@cbnewsd.cb.att.com, nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:>

>Well people who exercise are generally going to be in better physical shape
>than those who don't (yes, there's always the story about someone's Uncle
>Phil who never did anything but sit and eat rusty nails and lived to the
>ripe old age of 106) and there really is no dispute for that.  If someone
>choses to concentrate on their mind, that's fine but remember that your
>mind is part of your brain and the quality of how that thing works depends
>on how well you take care of your physical being.  If you let your body rot
>away, your mind is going to go with it.

Agreed, Nance. Guys like me and Ed are just in rotten shape. I stare
down at my comfortable beer belly and sigh. Then my mind just sinks
into disuse as I slobber and mumble and gibber like Dorian Grey did
when the knife went through the painting.

>If you keep a good steady supply of oxygen and blood cells rich with
>essential vitamins and minerals going to your brain, it's going to 
>function a hell of a lot better than if you sit on your butt all day
>and eat Doritos and drink Coke Classic until your teeth fall out.

Yes, but Doritos and Coke Classic go great with my Pall Malls.

>People who chose to exercise may have chosen to concentrate their abilities
>in one particular area for the time they are exercising, Ed, but given
>that the benifits will keep everything running optimally (including that
>brain you're so fond of) I'd say it's a superior choice to standing still.

Ahhhhhhgrgh...so is lying down.

>It's superior physically because it keeps you in shape.  It's superior
>intellectually because letting your body go to hell is stupid.  It's
>superior morally because you are going to be alive and well and contributing
>to the lives of people who love you instead of having an attitude like
>"eh, so I die, who cares" or, in the case of pregnancy, you're going to
>give the developing person inside you the best possible chance for a
>healthy life.

Hey Ed, remember that next time you get knocked up.
 
>Plus if you DO get sick or need surgery or something, the healthier
>you are, the quicker you will heal.  :-)
>
>>    Your humble servant,
>>                  Jimmy cracked corn.
>
>Oh lighten up, Dutton !  :-)

No,no, pour it on...this was the best yet!! :-\

Andy.

PLEASE ENJOY MY OMNIPOTENT IGNORANCE.


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: loosemore-sandra@CS.YALE.EDU (Sandra Loosemore)
Subject: Re: Dominance? (was: The Engagement Ring Question)
Organization: staff hacker @ Yale Haskell project
	<1a5oa0INNjql@uwm.edu> <jx+ptd-.aahz@netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 16:56:03 GMT

aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine) writes:

   In article <1a5oa0INNjql@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
   >
   >Actually since it's the left-handed elite that takes the active role in
   >defining everything for the rest of homanity, it is really the truth that the
   >ring symbolizes the dominance of the wearer over the giver, and the offering of
   >the ring, a gesture of supplication.  This, of course, being true, because the
   >left hand is naturally the superior hand.

   I'm sorry, but the above is just a tad gauche.

Well, I think it has a rather sinister ring to it!

-Sandra
From: probst@selkirk.sfu.ca (Scott Probst)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Date: 4 Oct 92 22:08:16 GMT
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada

In article <MARTINC.92Oct4161546@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>In article <1992Oct3.205144.28512@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>
>   In article <MARTINC.92Oct2122534@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>   >In article <1992Oct2.115332.11796@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>   >
>   >   I think you might be confusing Cro-Magnons with Neanderthals.  The
>
>   Now, Charlies, I really must protest your libel of the Neanderthals.
>   It's lucky for you that the dead can't sue.
>
>Charlies?  Are there two of me now?
>
>Actually, that might explain a lot.....
>
>   >Serious, I've read at least a few suggestions that Neanderthals and
>   >Cromagnons were a single interbreeding and that the Neanderthals didn't
>   >so much become extinct as be absorbed.  Maybe agriculture was too
>   >tempting.... 
>
>   Well, the two leading theories are that the Neanderthals were either
>   absorbed or exterminated by the Cro-Magnons.  Given European treatment
>   of various indigenous peoples, e.g., the Tasmanians, I'm not prepared to
>   rule out the latter.  However, agriculture can be ruled out.  Our Cro-
>   Magnon ancestors didn't make that mistake until about 30,000 years after
>   the Neanderthals were gone.
>
hmmm. a fellow here at SFU recently completed a dissertation which made the
thesis that neanderthals were never actually a distinct species, but that the
regular physical differences which give this impression (all, to my knowledge,
based on bone evidence) were caused by differences in use and physical activity.hmmm.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle)
Subject: Re: BalloonBoink, an Insider's Story
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 03:31:21 GMT

shannah@netcom.com (Teri Miller) writes:
>I was able to tempt my hubby's taste buds with some Habanero sauce

Ah, habaneros.  Try Grand Anse #5, the best bottled "hot" sauce ever made.
(There's no such thing as an actually _hot_ sauce in a bottle--the
bottling process takes the edge off the peppers.)  They also make a
delightful ketchup called Tassa, a habanero chili sauce (like the
chinese pastes) a pepper oil, and a grilling sauce (whatever that is.)

>Lunch itself was a very filling experience: Lou and I traded bites of
>lunch, and when dessert came, it turned into a feeding frenzy!
>Desserts were travelling around the table like a bunch of nomads, and
>Ray almost didn't get his back, because it had the most wonderful lime

Sounds delightful!  But--WHERE was lunch?  La Tertulia?  Coyote Cafe?
Rancho de Chimayo?  (OK, I know, that's in Chimayo, but the drive thru
the Sangre de Cristo (the high road to Taos) is incredible, especially
during a thunderstorm.  And the patio, open to they sky, is easily the
most spectacular place I've ever dined.  The sopaipillas are the best
I've had, and the bees think so too.)

See you next year, I hope.

-- 

Kiran Wagle                           <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 28 Sep 1992 01:24:20 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <5561@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes
>So, anyone say anthing interesting lately that I missed?  :-)

In article <1992Sep26.184716.1921@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
(A list of things Diamond missed)
>Trygve   (Did I skip anything?) 

Your physical dimensions.  Time to heat up the Diamond.

She also missed the story of the Family with 4 Liz's, the Articles with
Heavilty Erotic Signatures, the Appearance of Revolutionary New e-Skirt
Fashions, the Emergence of Another Diamond in our Midsts, Drieux's Resurfacing
and the Revelation of the Ultimate Reason for Death, an Article Posted by a
Baby, The Exposure of the Polyamorism Heresy and of its Fanatic Adherents, and
The Article That Held Within it the Seven Words That Will Attract the Interest
of and Arouse the Insatiable Desire of any Woman Who Beholds Them.

------------------------------------------------------------

"...like an old lover coming back for more, curved in the shape of your thigh
like it was made to do just that."
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: sdavey@triton.unm.edu (Sean Davey)
Subject: Re: Does anyone understand?
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 17:11:45 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Oct1.220322.28791@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu> stan@astro.ocis.temple.edu (Stan Horwitz) writes:
>
>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.
>

so, in the long run (or the big picture or whatever) do you really want to
be with someone like that?  I mean, there must be a reason she's staying with
some geek.  I do agree with you 'though that it's frustrating.  It's very
easy to say "she'd be much happier with me.  I'd treat her so much better."
I think you have to be true to yourself and say that you presented yourself
to her and if she choses not to be with you and to hang out with some loser,
then it's her loss.

>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.
>
>Stan 

ditto.  (well actually I thought it had happened, but I was informed that
I was WRONG :-)

Sean


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle)
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 09:21:43 GMT

shannah@netcom.com (Teri Miller) writes:

>There *are* some compensations, though - we blondes often have dates

Teri.  I din't know you were a blonde.

>while our more intellectually blessed sisters (mousey browns, one and
>all) are sitting at home alone pondering the intricacies of the universe.

Or sitting at a terminal posting to the net.  *smile*

-- 
"There are more things in heaven and earth than anyplace else."
 .........................................Tom Weller, _Minims_
-- 

Kiran Wagle                           <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: CENG51@maccvm.corp.mot.com (Craig Witkowski)
Subject: Re: What car is best?
Organization: Motorola
Date: 28 Sep 1992 14:43:43 CDT

------------------------- Original Article -------------------------
In article <1992Sep28.142848.10998@cbnewsd.cb.att.com>
>In article <1992Sep24.133504.22926@schbbs.mot.com> CENG51@maccvm.corp.mot.com (
>>>
>>Of course only the best dressed cars wear a "bowtie" --- the HEARTbeat of
>>America.  But at least a Mustang - even though it IS a Ford - can be called
>>a musclecar and a classic.  How many collectors are searcing for a "classic"
>>Honda?? :-)

>Not many.  Hondas aren't classics yet, you see, because even the
>earliest ones are still being driven.  When I was in the market for a
>car last year I couldn't help noticing that the oldest cars you see
>next to you in traffic are the Hondas.
>
>Says something for the quality.

>-Nance

Whatever floats your boat Nance.  I tried getting parts for my '78 Suzuki
rice bike and six months later the best my dealer could do is supply the
parts from a stripped wreck.  I guess the boat from Japan carrying the
voltage regulator I needed sunk! :-)

Meanwhile you can check ANY number of sources for American car and bike
parts dating back to Louis Chevrolet's and Henry Ford's creations.
And I'll still put up an old Monte Carlo against a Mitsu-honda-ota any day
for crash survival AND class! :-)

And when NASCAR allows ricebuckets to run the Daytona 500,  I'll eat a
Holley 830 CFM 4 bbl carb (filled with Unocal racing gas!) :-)
                                                           :-)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ron@turing.toronto.edu (Ron Wessels)
Subject: Re: Karaoke
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Date: 28 Sep 92 19:22:18 GMT

keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard) writes:
>I will say this about Nancy, though, she *is* interesting to read.
>I still prefer Angelwing's posts, but Nancy always seems to have
>an interesting angle on things.  

nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) responds:
>All right suck-head, and just what the *hell* do you mean by THAT??

I think he just called you acute person.

[ Wait a sec ... didn't we just have this thread somewhere else? ]

-- 
Ron Wessels		University of Toronto		ron@turing.toronto.edu
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: More on guys who aren't dating Ed Wright
Date: 30 Sep 1992 18:30:16 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: soc
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <MARTINC.92Sep29210821@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>In article <ewright.717737097@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:

>Why is it better to be miserable and perfect?

In article <1992Sep30.174350.15714@eecs.nwu.edu> carol@eecs.nwu.edu (Carol Surma) writes:
>One comment:  
>
>Perfectionists are people who take pains...  and give them to others. :-)

If one were truly perfect, one would be very happy.  After all, misery and
pain are imperfections.

So it's not better to be miserable and perfect -- because it's not possible.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 00:09:35 GMT

In article 1a9ic5INN75c@uwm.edu, markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:

>>>>>>>>>>(Didn't Charlie say he was NOT active in any way?)


Not at all. Andy did and now it is he who is posting. Do not confuse me
with Charlie, or anyone else. Just because I enjoy interacting on this
news group, and enjoy getting a few points in on the great debate, and
at times agreeing or disagreeing with Ed Wright, does not make me a
pseudonym for Charlie. 

    I AM ANDY, DAMMIT !

When you see this at the end, I posted, Not Charlie, most certainly not
Ed.

Andy.

PLEASE EXCUSE MY OBVIOUS IGNORANCE.

There, that's my signature, mine only and only mine, got it MARKO?

Ed at least treated me as a separate entity, then he lumped me into
the Charlie camp, then he didn't know who I was.

Andy.

PLEASE EXCUSE MY OBVIOUS IGNORANCE.



Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: just me
Subject: To all those "Christian girls"
Organization: Faith in Action
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 06:28:22 GMT

 HEY, all of you who are reading the stuff that doesn't carry your address !
And not just reading, you're responding to it ! Anyway, I don't mind, at least
it proves my point there are no interested girls of the kind I'd like to talk
to ...
Thanks, folks, and next time try to make fun of somebody else ...
I love you all, anyway, and you can't change it.
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Engaged Psychobitch from Hell Syndrome
Date: 30 Sep 92 15:01:28 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Sep29.223817.4930@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith) writes:
>
>Hmmm...the way you paraphrased me sounds nothing like the way I meant the 
>question! What I meant was more along the lines of "Would you seriously date
>someone who was not a virgin," not "would you seriously date someone who
>was sleeping with, or planned on sleeping with other women either now or
>while married to you." 


Oh, I see.  Yes, I would certainly seriously date someone who was not a
virgin.  A person's past is not terribly important to me; what's important
is who he is today.






-- 
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: What we find attractive
Keywords: nice lungs, there
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 13:10:34 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.051158.8087@samba.oit.unc.edu> Bathsheba.Grossman@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Bathsheba Grossman) writes:
>Chill, it was just a phase, OK?

 
 Is that to say your whippet days are behind you?
 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: wtr@mitre.org (Bill Ralston)
Subject: Re: Ipisissimus
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:22:13 GMT

in article <1992Oct5.161252.4548@desire.wright.edu> wall@hel4.brl.mil 
(Jeff Wall) writes:

>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????

I hate to do it, but I've had to take over as the treasurer, since the 
IIOSF lost (or will soon, anyway) all his money playing poker at a Boink.  
If you have two seesters, send one to me and one to the IIOSF.  If you 
only have one seester, send it to the IIOSF and send me a check for your 
bank balance.  If you don't have any seesters, borrow some.

Bill
Keeper of the Demimonde
wtr@mitre.org

** If my employer had any idea what I'm doing, I'd have to find a real job. **
From: parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Engaged Psychobitch from Hell Syndrome
Date: 30 Sep 1992 23:15:44 GMT
Organization: Wellington City Council, Wgtn, NZ
Reply-To: parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz
NNTP-Posting-Host: blade.wcc.govt.nz

In article <91014@netnews.upenn.edu>, crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:

>>question! What I meant was more along the lines of "Would you seriously date
>>someone who was not a virgin," not "would you seriously date someone who
>>was sleeping with, or planned on sleeping with other women either now or
>>while married to you." 
>
>Oh, I see.  Yes, I would certainly seriously date someone who was not a
>virgin.  A person's past is not terribly important to me; what's important
>is who he is today.

Experience can be a wonderful thing!    ;->



Rachel                           "Supergoof!"
                                    -  -
                                    O  O
                                      >
                                     \_/
From: dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 28 Sep 92 19:27:45 GMT
Reply-To: dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
Distribution: na
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <1992Sep28.190952.28341@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:

>It's
>superior morally because you are going to be alive and well and contributing
>to the lives of people who love you instead of having an attitude like
>"eh, so I die, who cares" or, in the case of pregnancy, you're going to
>give the developing person inside you the best possible chance for a
>healthy life.

Watch out Nance, now he's going to say that you accused him of being
pregnant.  

Dawn
"Oh, Time!  Of all the dwellers here below 
You only elevate buffoons or fools,
Or him whose anus as an inkstand serves."
The Perfumed Garden of the Shaykh Nefzawl, translated by Sir Richard F. Burton
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Re: Honesty (was: Re: Sarcasm, ego, arrogance,
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 05:25:36 GMT

In article 1aobsrINNc1g@uwm.edu, markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>In article <1aeoo6INN319@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>>Give me the beauty and body, and I'll take care of the rest, as she undergoes
>>the rigors of training under my control and so achieves a greatness in mind
>>to complement her other positive attributes.
>
>In article <1992Oct2.173929.18344@mks.com> fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter) writes:

>Some of these things are dictated by your cultural background.  White
>Anglo-Saxon, Germanic Protestant culture tends to adopt the priority of saying
>nothing at all.  At the other extreme, in the inner city you'd be damned if
>you didn't let everyone know how great you are.  It's practically an obligation
>especially when you're sharpening your claws to engage in some verbal sparring.


Yeah, and did you ever receive a boot to the head for your attitude?

I've been to some places where that attitude would find your crushed,
bleeding body in an open sewer, with rats gnawing at your most
redeeming features.

Andy.

IGNORANCE disclaimer applies.

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: Dominance? (was: The Engagement Ring Question)
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 15:29:00 GMT

In article <1a26avINNlcp@agate.berkeley.edu> epg@nature.Berkeley.EDU (little 'e' string) writes:
>In article <1992Sep21.103744.397@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>>Well, the significant point is the finger upon which the ring is placed.
>>By custom this is the third finger of the left hand, the so-called ring
>>finger.  The third finger (fourth digit) has the least independent mobility.
>>For most folks the left hand is the weaker and more submissive hand.  The
>>symbolism seems quite clear.  The recipient is committing to subordination.
>
>Well, some of us are left-handed and have a stronger left hand than right hand.
>So if I wear a ring on my left hand, am I committing to being the dominator? 

No, since it's the right-handed majority that defines the symbolism, and
it's others who will be responding to the ring's signal.  To project
dominance, wear the ring on the forefinger of the right hand.

-- Herb Huston
Xref: sparky soc.singles:27110 alt.romance:12312 alt.romance.chat:19156 talk.bizarre:33021
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.romance,alt.romance.chat,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: How long has it been?
Date: 6 Oct 92 23:16:57 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles,alt.romance,alt.romance.chat,talk.bizarre
Distribution: na
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: mneeley@nyx.cs.du.edu's message of 6 Oct 92 13:46:05 GMT

I don't want to think about it.
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am he who walks the States with a barb'd tongue, questioning every one I
meet,/Who are you that wanted only to be told what you knew before?/ Who are
you that wanted only a book to join you in your nonsense?"  W. Whitman.