HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ronan@codon3 (Karen Ronan;161 GPBB;x2-0884)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: need feedback
Date: 15 Apr 1992 14:28:37 GMT
Organization: University of California
NNTP-Posting-Host: codon3.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Apr14.230957.3850@iscsvax.uni.edu> wilms5839@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:
>Hi. I'm in need of some feedback on a situation I have gotten myself into. 
>I have found a wonderful man up here at the university. He is smart,
>considerate, jokes alot, has a wonderful personality, is easy to talk to and is
>witty. The problem is that he is a senior and graduates in 4 weeks. I on the
>other hand am a freshman and have at least 3 and 1/2 years to go yet. I have
>been the victim of bad long distance relationships. I wan't the relationship to 

You don't say what it means to be the "victim" of bad long distance
relationships. I wonder if you (unconsciously) were attracted to
and attracted a man who was about to leave *so that* you could have
yet another long-distance situation, only *this time* it would go
the way you wanted it to.

I have done the same thing and it wasn't that bad, but I can't
recommend it if you need/want someone to be there for the long haul.

-Karen
ronan@codon2.berkeley.edu

"Red lotus incense fades on
The jewelled curtain."
Xref: sparky alt.romance:6697 soc.singles:10545 soc.couples:1918
From: haskell@acsu.buffalo.edu (William W. Haskell)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Date: 7 Apr 92 14:47:58 GMT
Distribution: world,soc
Organization: UB


	A tough question.  It's hard to know when you're treading too far.
I was once in a situation where I ended up trying to woo someone away.  It
wasn't my original intention.  I was interested in the girl, but I was very
much of the attitude at that time that one doesn't mess with the another's
SO. Ever.  She made it known to me that she was interested in me, which made
it a very different situation in my mind.  I realized at that point that 
the choice to stay with her boyfriend or not was hers.  She would make that
decision with or without me sooner or later.  So I tried.  I shouldn't have
bothered, because she was playing games.  
	What you have to remember is that the person you are trying to "woo"
has free will, and will make his/her own decisions about where he/she wants
to go in life and what he/she wants to do.  If the person wants to get away
from their SO, they will do so regardless of you.  If they don't, then nothing
you can do will change that.  It never hurts to ask.  ( Unless the SO is
particularly mean and owns a particularly large gun. :)  Just if the person
says no, accept it and don't push.


						...wildy
Xref: sparky alt.romance:6934 soc.singles:10951 soc.couples:2047
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Do You Remember - early '60s edition
Date: 10 Apr 92 21:41:02 GMT
Followup-To: alt.romance
Distribution: usa
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Apr10.183910.14094@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
>
>Or how about:
>
>Gyroscopes - real space-age-looking tops that needed a string and
>             could do all sorts of neat tricks

Yep, I had one of these.
 
>Chatty Kathy - first doll on the market with a pull-string that
>             would make her talk.  As she got old and thrown around,
>             she'd start to sound like Chuckie.
 
Yep, I had one of...oops, what am I saying.

>Water Rockets - made of red and blue plastic, you'd fill them with
>             water and launch them and I don't know what else they
>             did because we could never get them to work.

They usually worked once.  The first time that you launched them they
go way up and come down in the street and crack so that you couldn't 
build up the pressure for the next time. 

>Chox -       Multivitamins you could actually chew.
 
The name described how they tasted.  Thank Bedrock for Flintstone vitamins.
I once ate half a jar of Flintstone vitamins.  My favorite was the "Dino"

>Betsy Wetsy - Doll you'd feed with a toll baby bottle and the
>             water would run out of a hole in her bottom.  My mother
>             wouldn't let me have one.
 
Yep, I had one of those.

>Vrrooooom    - You'd mount it on the handlebars of your bike and turn
>             a key and it would go "vrrooooom..."
 
Nah, we just attached playing cards to the front forks with a clothespin
so that it went flap-flap-flap-flap.

-- 
+=============================================================================+
| John Fereira                Al Bundy for President          
| johnf@auspex.com         "He's as good as the next guy"                     |
+=============================================================================+
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: wmcgillivray@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU (DARK_KNIGHT)
Subject: Re: Do You Remember - early '60s edition
Reply-To: wmcgillivray@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU
Organization: California State University, Chico
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 22:49:02 GMT

What about the greatest car I have ever owned.  A 1964 Chevrolet Corvair
Monza Spyder.  What acceleration.  Ralph Nader...eat s**t.  There was
nothing wrong with those cars.  I really loved mine.
D  A  R  K
         N         \\\\\___________________\
         I         /////                   /
         G            "Arrow of Chivalry"
         H            (like the Lone Rangers silver bullet)
         T
Xref: sparky alt.romance:6713 soc.singles:10569 soc.couples:1931
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Keywords: Scruples
Date: 7 Apr 92 18:07:09 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <ku32idINNqj9@girtab.usc.edu> jodar@girtab.usc.edu (Nicholas Jodar) writes:
>In article <1992Apr7.005929.11543@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> rnjx@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:
>
>As with any question of ethics, it's a personal choice.  Some
>people consider stealing bad, others think it's fine and dandy.
>
>For myself, I refuse to become romantically involved with a
>person who is already in a relationship.  Until they are 
>'available,' my interaction with them is restricted to a level of
>frienship.  This is my own choice.  If a person cannot be trusted
>in a minor affair, how can they be trusted in a more serious
>matter?
>
>That is my line, it's clearly drawn, and I endeavor NEVER to
>cross it.  If I have a belief, I adhere to it.
>
>-Nick
>
>'How they look at the game is how they look at Life.'
>
C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S !!!!!!!! to Nick.  Another member
of the rare breed of the human species who is secure enough with 
their own self so they can express his/her own belief without being
opinionated, judgemental, blaming, self righteous, and condemn all
others who just don't agree.

Am I condemning those who condemn?????

					steve
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison)
Subject: Re: a question
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Ancient Souls Inc.
Date:  8 Apr 1992 09:19 EST  

In article <ku4attINN5fu@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>, erc@pogo.Corp.Sun.COM (Ed Carp) writes...
>In article <6APR199211450499@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov> afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes:
> 
>>(...and don't think I didn't already consider *and* reject the Jack-In-The-Box 
>> joke.  It was too tasteless even for *me*... oops.)
> 
>[popping in from porting-software-to-linux-land]
> 
>I didn't know that ANYTHING was too tasteless for you, Stephen! :)
>--

True, ed, but this is a *public* net, ergo I *meant* it was too tastless 
for even *me* to *post.  If you want tasteless, though, how about ...
(if you're offended by tastless things, press `n' to skip this)

Last chance, press `n' now ... this is *really* tasteless ...


Creme`o'Wheat !

That stufe tastes like wallpaper paste ! :-)

-- Stephen 

(The only two valid e-mail addresses from now on are ...)
afdenis@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov,  afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov
.. boring .sig follows, press n to skip it.

	Never regret a *choice*.  Rather, save your regrets for the
	choices you *didn't* make.

Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Organization: Bradley University
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 03:38:41 GMT

pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich) writes:

>No! This is all wrong, or if not all wrong, at least based on a notion
>of relationships that is at best stifling and at worst limited. Other
>people's SO's who you are interested in are people too. If you make
>romantic overtures to them, they are perfectly capable of saying, "No,
>thanks" if that's what they mean and "Sure" if that's what they mean. The
>consequences between them and the person they are "officially" involved
>with are their lookout. Now that's not to say bad things may not happen,
>or that you should make a move on someone who's vulnerable to get them to
>do something clearly not in their best interest, but those are dangers
>whether someone is officially attached or not.

This would make a good epilogue to my response to the original question.
An unwritten rule that I failed to mention is that I would not take steps
toward someone if I thought that it would cause undue harm to the woman
involved.  I mean, there's testing the waters and then there's just being
reckless.  I thought this would go without saying, but then after reading
the first dozen or so responses in this string I thought an elaboration was
appropriate.

>
>A coupla stories:
>One time I mentioned to a friend of mine that I had been fairly strongly
>interested in her, but hadn't asked her out because she was seeing someone
>else at the time and I didn't want to interfere. She responded with a good
>deal of annoyance, pointing out that she wasn't the property of the person
>she was going out with and would have preferred to make her own choice
>rather than having me make it for her.
>
>Another friend of mine did the classic bit of going out with one guy, then
>falling in love with someone else over the summer... When the first guy
>came back, both he and the second one reacted with strong territorial
>instincts, insisting that she choose between them. Instead, at serious
>personal pain, she told both of them to go away because she didn't like
>what the way they fought said about the way they thought about her.
>
>
>I am _not_ advocating wooing people in relationships just for the heck
>of it. Nonetheless, if two people start falling for each other and one
>of them is in a relationship already, then (gasp) they should talk
>about what to do rather than one of them deciding unilaterally.
>At least that's my humble thoughts on the matter.
>
>paul
-- 
=========*davE*.....making the world safe for intelligent dance music.=========
As you're cleaning the orange carpet, you will hear a voice that says, "Fetch 
my cigarettes."  Another voice will say, "THEY'RE ON TOP OF THE REFRIGERATOR."
--(David Vessell)--(Bradley University Computing Services)-(dave@bradley.edu)--
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: Sarek@world.std.com (Garrett S Fitzgerald)
Subject: Re: Remaining friends with an ex SO.
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 01:35:04 GMT

>In article <3255@daily-planet.concordia.ca> stefanos@concour.cs.concordia.ca (KIAKAS stefanos) writes:
>?>      i hope it works, but i can see problems in the future ( i.e. a new SO 
>?> who does not like the fact that we were once lovers ) and i would like to 
>?> hear from people who have had experiences like this, 

I stayed friends with an ex-SO, and over time we drifted apart, in
part because of my new relationship. One night I called her up and we
got together for pizza. She asked me some questions about my
relationship that I answered because of what we had shared. Later on,
I told my SO about our chat. She hit the roof. Since then, I've kept
my mouth shut, but we're still friends. My SO isn't thrilled, but I
don't want her to dictate to me about my friends, and I intend to
return the favor. 
-----------------
-- 

Sarek of Vulcan
a.k.a. Garrett Fitzgerald

Xref: sparky alt.romance:6795 soc.singles:10719 soc.couples:1975
From: csuat@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Pete "Ganders" Favelle)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:39:49 GMT
	<CSUAT.92Apr8011953@lily.warwick.ac.uk>
	<1992Apr8.151924.27508@u.washington.edu>
Distribution: world,soc
Organization: Computing Services, Warwick University, UK
Originator: csuat@lily


on 8 Apr 92 15:19:24 GMT,
intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing) said:
[...]
>>  As for someone who's engaged, I can't see _any_ way of justifying trying to
>>start a relationship there. To me, engagement is a commitment to marriage, and
>>my attitude is that marriage (and, therefore, engagement) is something I'd
>>_never_ attempt to disrupt.

> Again, it's not just a case of seeing a women you're attracted to and
> deciding that you're going to make her forget her husband.  Good heavens. 
> If you can "start a relationship" with a woman who's engaged you might ask
> yourself just what's she's engaged in.

  I never said I'd _succeed_ in wooing anybody away from anyone - just that I
wouldn't try :)

  I was just looking at it from the other side - I'd hate for somebody to try
wooing somebody _I_ was engaged to. Ok, so I'd be certain nothing would come
of it, but what the heck, I'm paranoid...

Hugs,

Ganders
--
	      "There's no time for us, there's no place for us."
     "What is this thing that builds our dreams, yet slips away from us?"

-- 
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<
#	     cstxqcv@dcs.warwick.ac.uk / csuat@csv.warwick.ac.uk	     #
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: twmn3@isuvax.iastate.edu
Subject: Love Sucks.....
Reply-To: twmn3@isuvax.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 03:15:04 GMT

One things which I found out through out the years is that love sucks....
I mean you can have any girl you want if you have alot of money to dump
but no girl will stick to you if you have only pennies to spend. In this
money craze world.... Money rules over love.
				Taken from "Lovers are suckers."

Tell me what you people think of this passage.
						Tommy.
From: erc@pogo.Corp.Sun.COM (Ed Carp)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Ed and Teresa (Carp ????)
Keywords: Let's mind our own business
Date: 16 Apr 92 16:57:17 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogo.corp.sun.com

In article <9gzj6!p.tyger@netcom.com> tyger@netcom.com (Kristen Kohlbecker) writes:

>You can, but then the scumbunny that sent the mail would have every right to
>go to your sysadmin and whimper. Whether it would get him anywhere, is, I
>guess, another matter altogether. The main problem with the laws governing

Well, I *am* my sysadmin :)  The guy that is responsible for the local
cluster doesn't care what we do on the net :)  Any mail that goes to root@pogo
gets bounced to me. :)
--
Ed Carp                                      415/336-0797 (work)

++ UNIX  SysAdmin, Systems  Programming  Services,  Utilities ++
++ and Programmer Productivity Tools                          ++
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: pfleming@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Patrick E Fleming)
Subject: Re: Love Sucks.....
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 14:17:40 GMT


Teresa Kline writes:

>I am perfectly content going for a walk in the park, maybe a picnic that I
>make up.  Watching a video at home works for me.  None of these activities
>takes a lot of money.

But Teresa - those are dates on which you can't hide behind some grandios event
and you have to deal with one another as people!  (Oops - I guess that's the 
point, isn't it? :-)

     - Pat
.
-- 
- Patrick E. Fleming ------------------------------------------------------
- Department of Chemistry --- I'm looking for the spirit of a great heart -
- The Ohio State University ----------- Guk a 'mzimba Sala 'nhliziyo ------
- pfleming@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu --------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 16:40:50 GMT

In article <14xW02mCc7EC00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jsp@pls.amdahl.com writes:
>dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell) writes:
>

>I'm sorry, but I just cannot believe that anyone really and truly feels
>this way.  To me, this is like walking down the street, seeing a car with
>the keys in it, and jumping in and driving it away.  You can rationalize
>all you want that if the owner didn't want his car stolen, he shouldn't
>have left the keys in it, but you still committed theft.  (And before I
>get jumped on, I am not equating relationships with property ownership,
>it's just the first analogy that popped to mind, ok?)
>
>Or maybe a better analogy is that of banging on a window with a hammer.
>You can say that if the glass is strong, then your efforts won't amount
>to a hill of beans anyway, and if your actions break the glass then it
>probably wasn't very strong to begin with.  But you can't get away from
>the fact that if you had left the window alone, it would still be fine.
>
>The point is that such is just rationalization.  Whatever the state of
>an existing relationship, whether it be strong or weak, your efforts to
>actively break it up introduce a new element.  And who are you to say
>what would have happened if you'd stayed out?  Many relationships have
>weathered shakey times and ended up stronger for it.  Your interference
>could be the straw that breaks a camel's back that might very well have
>otherwise recovered.
>
>--James Preston


I still can't believe that in todays society, men still view women
as personal property.  Are we still hanging on to the CroMagnon
mentality????  I know you so boldly stated that you are not comparing
relationships with property ownership, but you did it twice.  A car
and a window do not have the ability to think and choose for itself
(as far as I know).  Women have free will, choice, and are capable of
making decisions for themselves.  If a guy expresses an interest in
dating them and they are already involved in a fulfilling relationship
they can simply say "I'm flattered, but no thank you, I'm already 
involved".  The relationship will not crumble just because I may have
asked her out.  And visa versa.  Enough said.

					Steve
From: cpearson@ducvax.auburn.edu (MISTYEYES)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Do You Remember - early '60s edition
Date: 11 Apr 92 03:26:00 GMT
Followup-To: alt.romance
Distribution: usa
Organization: Auburn University--Auburn, AL
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    Lines: 49

In article <12408@auspex-gw.auspex.com>, johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes...
>In article <1992Apr10.183910.14094@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
>>
>>Or how about:
>>
>>Gyroscopes - real space-age-looking tops that needed a string and
>>             could do all sorts of neat tricks
> 
>Yep, I had one of these.
> 
>>Chatty Kathy - first doll on the market with a pull-string that
>>             would make her talk.  As she got old and thrown around,
>>             she'd start to sound like Chuckie.
> 
>Yep, I had one of...oops, what am I saying.
> 
>>Water Rockets - made of red and blue plastic, you'd fill them with
>>             water and launch them and I don't know what else they
>>             did because we could never get them to work.
> 
>They usually worked once.  The first time that you launched them they
>go way up and come down in the street and crack so that you couldn't 
>build up the pressure for the next time. 
> 
>>Chox -       Multivitamins you could actually chew.
> 
>The name described how they tasted.  Thank Bedrock for Flintstone vitamins.
>I once ate half a jar of Flintstone vitamins.  My favorite was the "Dino"
> 
>>Betsy Wetsy - Doll you'd feed with a toll baby bottle and the
>>             water would run out of a hole in her bottom.  My mother
>>             wouldn't let me have one.
> 
>Yep, I had one of those.
> 
>>Vrrooooom    - You'd mount it on the handlebars of your bike and turn
>>             a key and it would go "vrrooooom..."
> 
>Nah, we just attached playing cards to the front forks with a clothespin
>so that it went flap-flap-flap-flap.
> 
>-- 
>+=============================================================================+
>| John Fereira                Al Bundy for President          
>| johnf@auspex.com         "He's as good as the next guy"                     |
>+=============================================================================+
I laughed through this whole post !!!! thanks for the memories :)_

Colleen ( aka MistyEyes)
From: pisarevsky@b56vxg.kp01.kodak.com (Arkady Pisarevsky)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: LOVE sucks. No question about it.
Date: 2 Apr 92 15:09:31 GMT
Reply-To: pisarevsky@b56vxg.kp01.kodak.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: Big Yellow Box
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-a4

In article <1992Apr2.044615.10658@leland.Stanford.EDU>, wanderer@leland.Stanford.EDU (Anthony William Cannon) writes...
>In article <2_jj6#q.tyger@netcom.com> tyger@netcom.com (Kristen Kohlbecker) writes:
>>In article <1992Mar31.165517.1@pomona.claremont.edu> greg@pomona.claremont.edu (Tigger) writes:
>>>In article <1992Mar31.222556.26258@cbnewse.cb.att.com>, hjanssen@cbnewse.cb.att.com (hank janssen) writes:
>>>> There is no question about it. After living with somebody for a year i
>>>> have found out that  without  question  LOVE  is  the  most  overrated
>>>> emotion ever.
>>>Yup.  It sucks.  Do yourself a favor and give it up before it kills you.

   Well, I followed this thread for a while and would like to offer a comment
or two. I think love is a wonderful emotion, it puts you in a state of bliss
and you feel like you can accomplish anything you want. But then you come
off of the cloud that you were floating on and have to face reality. And this 
reality can be quite harsh. 

   IMHO I think what sucks is not love but the pain and devastation that you
have to deal with when love dies. Yes, love is mortal, just like we are mortal
and sometimes it grows strong, matures, and lasts a lifetime. Other times
it crashes in flames and tries to burn your soul. And it will, if you let it.

   Folks, I think whoever started this thread is in the midst of flames right
now. It is affecting his outlook and we should consider this in our responses.

>>>> Male decency does not pay anymore it seems,
>>>It never did.

    I disagree. I treated the lady I was involved with very decently, and 
I am glad I did. I wouldn't have it any other way. I have no regrets about 
anything I did and nothing to apologize for. Even though the pain of break 
up was quite severe, it would have been a lot worse if I was being a jerk 
to her. 

>>You have to exhibit it before it can pay off. Communication helps too. God

    Possibly he did exhibit it, but towards the wrong person who didn't 
appreciate it or want it ? Some people are gluttons for punishment, literally.

>Hey guys, lets all get together and write hate mail, ok?

    Lets not. At least not in this newsgroup. Go over to soc.singles, they
seem to enjoy flammage.
**-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-**
**   Disclaimer:  Eastman Kodak Co. does not support all of my views.    **
**   EMAIL:  pisarevs@kodak.com                                          **
**-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-**
Newsgroups: alt.romance