HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wjb@moscom.UUCP (Bill de Beaubien)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Kiran Wagle
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:56:53 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford, NY
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

: trygve lode writes:
:            oldman@coos.dartmouth.edu (Prakash Das) writes:
:
:[lots of stuff personally attacking Kiran Wagle]
:
: I have to admit I don't understand your problems with Kiran's postings;
: personally, I find them interesting and enjoyable.  You say that Kiran
: is opinionated, a trait shared by most soc.singlers, and that this is
: a negative trait.  It would be difficult to keep soc.singles interesting
: if it weren't for its opinionated contributors--indeed, I would quickly
: become bored if there weren't people here who have strong opinions and
: who are willing to express them.  

Well, actually, since you've demonstrated possession of opinions with intent
to post in the past, you wouldn't be here to be bored...  or would it be that
you were bored because you weren't here?

In any case, I've certainly never had any problems with Kiran's postings.
I happen to like his writing style, for whatever that's worth. :-)
-- 
"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: lana@magenta.corp.sgi.com (Lana Mountford)
Subject: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 20:31:41 GMT

In article <1992Aug24.225658.11654@cs.ucla.edu>, gds@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:
|> 
|> It's too bad people who want the same things out of life can't find
|> each other more easily.  I had an SO once who insisted that I kill all
|> the spiders that she saw, even if they weren't near her.
|> 

I rarely kill spiders anyway, except for brown recluse.  "Daddy long legs"
are beneficial, and the rest are pretty much harmless.  Besides, my cats
do a pretty good job.  :-)

-- 

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|    /)                      | Lana Mountford    
|   / /  __    ___    __     | Silicon Graphics  
|__(_/__(__)\__/  )__(__)\__ | Mountain View, CA 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Subject: Re: Finding Long Romantic Partners
Keywords: Lime Pie
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 11:21:52 GMT

In <1992Aug31.231357.3543@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:

>In article <ewillims.715003060@unix1.tcd.ie> ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
>>
>>	Well, John did mention your hot tub but I would have thought
>>a dungeon was a very peculiar place to have one... (*Dubious Look*)

>Not at all--why, I do a wonderful variant of "Chinese Water Torture" using
>the water jets....

	Oh but Trygve, it's so cold and damp down in the dungeon  that
I would be trembling all over...
(Maybe you could remove the cause but not the sympton? *GRIN*)


>>>>>Trygve   (I'll provide plenty of chocolate sauce.) 
>>>>	
>>>>	Hmmmm.....maybe I'll come after all!:>
>>>>
>>>Guaranteed.  (Or your monkey back.) 
>>	
>>	Oh, you demand payment in kind? (*GRIN*)

>Well, considering the high cost of operating the laboratory, it would be
>nice of you to chimp in.

	In bananas?:>
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Various ramblings...
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:21:56 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <14471@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:

	(observation about how only intelligent people will find 
         intelligence atttractive)

>Given your observation, how many people do you think are going to claim that
>intelligence is not a "sexual attractiveness plus"?

Hee hee.  Good point.  This reminds me a little bit of that fantastic 
marketing ploy, "extra large" condoms.  Not everyone buys them, but I 
bet lots of people *claim* to buy them.

>What does being employeed have to do with being intelligent or for resenting
>someone that they may suspect was more intelligent.  Have you ever been 
>unemployeed?  I have.  It's no fun.  Being unemployed has nothing to do
>with intelligence nor job skills.  Being unemployed does, however contribute
>to a persons self-esteem.   It makes it difficult to taken women like Diamond
>out to dinner when you haven't had a paycheck in nine months.

I'd offer to take *you*, but while I am employed I'm making just about
enough money to feed myself and my two feathered apartmentmates, barely,
and no one else.  Thanks for the thought, though.  I agree with the observation
that being unemployed has nothing to do with intelligence level.  (I think
it says a something about MY intelligence level that I've indentured myself
for the next five years for slave wages, but that's a different story.  :-))

>+============================================================================+
>| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
>| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
>+============================================================================+

				--Diamond
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Tallllll women....
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:40:19 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <ymmnyd-@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>In article <_mmnz6q.aahz@netcom.com> aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep4.022040.2024@panix.com> jis@panix.com (Jack Szwergold) writes:
>>>Well, that may be your problem, but I have my own (sorta).  I'm 5'8",
>>>taller than most women I know, or have dated.  Yet some consider me short
>>>when compared to other guys?  I hate this double standard!!! Arrrgggghhh...
>>I've felt this way at various points, but trust me, it just doesn't
>>matter.
>It doesn't matter- but it is _much_ nicer to date a woman that you can look
>straight in the eye, and not straight over her head. I'll date short women
>(hell, to me, anything under 5'10" in a woman is 'short' :), but, given a
>preferential choice, I'll take tall :)

I'll agree if you change the "_much_" to "somewhat".  The only activity
I'm interested in that height plays a part is dancing -- unless someone
only lives to dance, there are few other activities for which height
changes the mechanics of the situation.  And, of course, there can be
advantages to having a partner on the short side.

>ps- the quote thingy was from the old Bill Murray movie 'Meatballs'.

Congratulations.
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

So much Astroglide.  So little time.
From: liz@prc.unisys.com (Liz Loquacious)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Chocolate Urgies
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:59:15 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: Paramax Systems

In article <1992Aug28.145041.19239@cbnewsd.cb.att.com>, nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
|> 
|> The Swiss, Dutch, and Belgian chocolates are by far my favorite.  Viennese
|> is heavenly.  German is OK.  Pass on the Czech.  Our Hershey's and Nestle's
|> and Fannie May's are fine, but just not that "I've died and gone to
|> Switzerland" chocolate.  Not even Cadbury gets close.  :-)

Mmmmmm, I just had a visitor from the Netherlands who brought me a box of
chocolates from my favorite chocolatier in Maastricht!  It was heaven!

|> I've never had chocolate from York.  Want my address Emma??  :-)

I'd be glad to give you mine too!

Liz Loquacious - you should see how I drink my chocolate milk!
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Date: 3 Sep 92 18:08:55 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <5084@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
|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 few years ago I was one of the cleverest Halloween costumes ever.  A woman
dressed up in a nice dress fashioned a table with tablecloth and complete
dinner settings that she had glued to the top.  The table stuck out about
three feet in front of her.  She'd walk up to a guy so that the other side
of the table was in front of him.  She was a dinner date.

In an attempt at a constructive suggestion you might check into some singles
dinner clubs that might be in your area.  I've heard of a few around where
a group of singles meet for dinner once a month or so.  You might check
in the rec.food groups as a start for your search for such a thing.

|>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. 
 
pbbbttt. pbbbttt. rrinn-nn-nn. pbbbtt. rinn-rinn-rinn-nnn-nnn-nnnn-nnnn....

I'll have to agree with Kiran.  I got a kick out of the comments about the
tequila sunrises and the ex.  You've already shown a sense of humor which,
for me, would go a long way to making an enjoyable dinner companion. 

-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Subject: Re: attentive dependence Was: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 12:30:17 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.205253.10432@ils.nwu.edu> dmm@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (donald) writes:
>My last girlfriend tried -according to several friends- to elicit in
>me a feeling of dependence......

>...when grad-school or friends diverted me for a while (as deadlines and
>crises still tend to do) it wouldn't take long for her to uproot
>things:
>	"...great movie."
>	"We should break up."

ending #1.
(pulls out gun) *blam*
"Conseeder it eh divohce"

ending #2
"Okay."
Proceed to approach attractive woman who has been sitting alone across the
aisle for conversation.

This oughta teach her not to do it a second time.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max)
Subject: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 20:09:43 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.195933.9280@odin.corp.sgi.com> lana@magenta.corp.sgi.com (Lana Mountford) writes:
>In article <1992Aug24.214418.1945@walter.bellcore.com>, walter (Walter Lego) writes: 
>|> If they grew up in the East coast, you must forgive them for they may have been
>|> exposed for too long to the "prim and proper" ladies in abundance out here.
>|> 
>|> 						Walter
>
>Hmmmm ... interesting.  I'm originally from the midwest (KCMO, to be
>precise), and I lived in the southeast (SC) and east (Washington, D.C.).
>Maybe it is a regional thing?  I've thought for some time that maybe it's
>an "age" or "experience" thing -- but I dunno.  Are east coast guys more
>likely to try to "rescue" than west coast guys? <thinking ... lessee,
>*he* was from Ohio, and was a rescuer; *he* was from Phoenix, and was a
>rescuer; he was from CA, was much younger and *wasn't* a rescuer; he was
>from Wisconsin, much younger, not a rescuer ...> In my experience, it
>seems to be more age-related, rather than geographically-related.
>
Actually I don't think it has to do with age or locality (although there
are probably fewer do it yourselfers in the east than the west on a per
capita basis both male and female). What I think the male rescuer wants is
security. If you (meaning the woman) need him, are dependent on him, then
you are less likely to leave him. I think that is why I became so
attractive to these men when I was building my house. They preceived a
"niche" to fill in my life where they could make themselves needed sorta
like building up ones job security at work by being the only person who
knows how some particular thing is done.
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Diamonds
Date: 3 Sep 92 12:38:09 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <1992Sep3.000258.13135@hpcvca.cv.hp.com> watson@hpcvcah.cv.hp.com (Jeffrey Watson) writes:
>If you've got the body of a female Arnold Schwartzeneggar then Diamond is
>appropriate (it is the name for one of the hulking females on American
>Gladiators). :^)
>
>Jeff

NOT.  I'm not terribly muscular and I have *never* been described as
'hulking' (at least not to my face :-)).  I'm trying to get myself into
better shape, but I don't think I'll ever have the leisure time to weightlift
often enough to make myself look like a professional wrestler.  If that's
going to be a condition of my new name, perhaps we should just forget the
whole thing. :-)

			Diamond (the non-hulking one NOT paid silly 
				 amounts of money for a specialized form
			         of stage combat)
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:32:52 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <14473@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>You are *really* in trouble.  With that kind of attitude, people from as
>far away as, say, Santa Clara, Cal. will be asking you out for dinner, or 
>at least suggesting that would make a good dinner companion.  

Why not?  Anyone from Santa Clara who wants to have dinner with me will
have to come here, because I *sure* can't afford a plane ticket, and I'm
not about to refuse a simple dinner date to anyone willing to go to that
much trouble. :-)

>Oh sure, meet someone interesting at the University and drop us like a lead
>balloon.  We've seen the wide-band come-on mode.  Now we have the wideband
>LJBF.

No!  It's not that!  It's just that I can't type and eat at the same time.
(I am really bummed, by the way, that this Boston Boink is happening 
now that I've left Boston.  Sigh.  Story of my life.)  

>Apparently, the wrong one. (city)

Well, let me know if you ever find yourself in town. 

>+==========================================================================+
>| John Fereira     | Auspex Systems | "Auspex does not share my opinions.  |
>| johnf@auspex.com | Santa Clara CA |  So Why am I still working here?"    |
>+==========================================================================+

				--Diamond
From: jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Mea Non Culpa
Date: 2 Sep 92 17:43:26 GMT
	<1992Aug31.215341.26754@nwnexus.WA.COM> <71891@apple.Apple.COM>
	<1992Sep2.120950.4455@nwnexus.WA.COM>
Organization: Bear, Stearns & Co. - FAST
In-reply-to: enigma@halcyon.com's message of 2 Sep 92 12:09:50 GMT


In article <1992Sep2.120950.4455@nwnexus.WA.COM> enigma@halcyon.com (Matt Luders) writes:

   Perhaps soc.singles needs a FAQ to explain the "soc.single meaning" of words
   like "boink" and "suckup"--words that have *very* different meanings to the
   outside world.  Or would this remove all challenge?  :-)

Probably...

   At least I have the distinction of starting a thread that at last count had no
   fewer than 37 articles in it. :-)

Aah!  Yer lernin' now -- an EXCELLANT self-suckup!!! Keep up the good work!


						Spidey!!!



--
 /\ \  / /\  Josh Diamond                              		   jmd@bear.com
//\\ .. //\\ AKA Spidey!!!                        ...!ctr.columbia.edu!ursa!jmd
//\((  ))/\\
/  < `' >  \          Beauty is the purgation of superfluities. -- Michelangelo
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Date: 27 Aug 92 22:48:34 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <BRUCE.92Aug26161342@suprenum.supr.scm.liv.ac.uk> bruce@supr.scm.liv.ac.uk (Bruce Stephens) writes:
|
|>Hmmm...I think we need to conduct careful experiments to determine which
|>technique is the most effective.  How's about you show up at my laboratory
|>wearing nothing at all and I'll be there without my sweater and we'll see
|>what happens?
|> 	
|> 	laboratory???  Isn't that another word for your dungeon??
|> Don't you chain people up in your dungeon? (*GRIN*)
|
|Sounds colder than a laboratory.  I hope trygve doesn't let people get
|cold.  (Perhaps you should take a sweater after all.)

Trygve has already informed us that the hot tub is used to heat up the 
subjects of his experiements.  

-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
From: oldman@coos.dartmouth.edu (Prakash Das)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Kiran Wagle (Was Re: Las Vegas)
Date: 23 Aug 92 18:22:02 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <kiran.714485339@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>
>*laugh*  Did you see the post from another lurker that said that "she"
>should be told not to quote 99% of an article for a one line reply?
>I was thinking of telling the writer that s/he should ask MaX how often
>I have, er, commented on this...
>
>Lurkers can be fun sometimes.

Well, er, Mr. Wagle I wonder now.... Gee, you are so interesting
and full of knowledge, you don't hesitate to give discourses on 
so much of the stuff that's being discussed here.
Yet, according to one of your very own posts, you say that you
wouldn't know really because you haven't been there (of course, I
am paraphrasing). I hope you have not outpuffed yourself out of
your armchair psychotherapist's chair. Your compulsion to respond
to and post on nearly everything is what provides ready
entertainment to us, what your great self labels, lurkers. Even
Shakespeare is no match to the erudite language that your posts
come wrapped in. I could go on like you do, but then us lurkers
most often choose not to for the sake of the rest of the net folks. 

PS: BTW, MaX has already informed me, so I see that you don't
even practise what you mouth out....

Yes, lurkers can be fun sometimes, but prolific posters never are.

-PD
From: stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Exactly what I mean by "unattached"...
Date: 26 Aug 92 19:03:12 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:

>I get the feeling that many people find it very important that their
>feelings be uncontrollable and fundamentally incomprehensible and
>illogical; why, I'm not quite sure, though I suspect that it may be
>because they feel the need for life to be mysterious and beyond their
>comprehension and control or that they feel threatened by science and
>logic.

Circular. My guess is that there are two reasons people subscribe to this
belief. (1) Most people never learn or figure out the tools and techniques
one can use to change one's emotions. (2) Many people feel pressure from
family, co-workers, and so on, to control their emotions, that is, to show
only those emotions that are deemed appropriate by others.

Therefore, most people will claim they cannot change their emotions 
both because it has been difficult for them, and because they are afraid 
that if they did figure out how to change their emotions, they would be 
expected to change to suit the people around them.

I grew up in a family where only appropriate emotions could be expressed.
As a result I had almost no emotions for many years, and then once I began
to have them again, I fiercely denied my ability to change them in any way. 

It is interesting that once I accepted my emotions and found an SO who
accepted the way I express them, they became much easier to deal with. I
didn't have to work to change the ones I didn't like so much - they have
more or less been changing of their own accord, and have been much more
easily affected by rational arguments.

Stef
stef@apple.com
--
I aske not labored letters which should weare
Long papers out: nor letters which should feare
Dishonest carriage: or a seer's art:
Nor such as from the brayne come, but the hart. --John Donne
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Subject: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:20:54 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <1992Aug25.151319.13394@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
>
>I don't know about you, but I don't have a hard time weeding the happy
>peaceful content people from the stoic advice-givers in this group.  It's
>VERY easy.  One group speaks from hypothetic conclusions; the other from life.

Well, golly-gee willickers, I guess I've never been alive.  I'm sure the
ProblemOlderWoman will be terribly disappointed.
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

So much Astroglide.  So little time.
Newsgroups: soc.singles