HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bruce@uxb.liv.ac.uk (Bruce Stephens)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: E.W. - Women's cycles...
Date: 1 Oct 92 16:39:44 GMT
Organization: Centre for Mathematical Software Research, Univ. Liverpool, UK

>>>>> On 26 Sep 92 17:08:59 GMT, huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) said:

> ...
> By the way, right now is the time of year that hormone levels in the human 
> male reach their seasonal peak (Tennyson was no biochemist and was quite 
> wrong about spring and a young man's fancy). ...

And I thought it was just the new intake of female students.
--
Bruce  "Sorry gorgeous, it's that time of the year"  Stephens
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: Does anyone understand?
Organization: I can't see any in the immediate vicinity...
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 05:50:18 GMT

In article <v09njcg.aahz@netcom.com> aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine) writes:
[on the Life/Clue Mutual Exclusion Principle]
>Sorry, you're at least a couple of years too late.  The redheaded
>drummer was the first poster of this.

Ah.  Oh, well.  It was worth a try.  :-)



-- 
Kevin Brown					kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
This is your .signature virus: < begin 644 .signature (9V]T8VAA(0K0z end >
	    This is your .signature virus on drugs: <>
			Any questions?
Xref: sparky soc.singles:26959 misc.kids:25029
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,misc.kids
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Date: 3 Oct 1992 14:40:33 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <1992Sep30.180924.17599@cbfsb.cb.att.com> joni@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (joni.dunlap) writes:
>     phrases is "Math class is hard".  I can't imagine a product better

In article <1992Oct1.151222.19331@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
>at some of them, but I personally don't have a problem with "math class
>is hard."  I might, however, suggest something like "That shower felt

In article <1992Oct1.164641.13426@nynexst.com> clare@nynexst.com (Clare Chu) writes:
>  or "Math class is hard, but I'm good at it because I study."

Or "if they taught sex in high school like they taught math, teenagers wouldn't
get pregnant anymore."
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 17:54:52 GMT

In article <ewright.717782850@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>
>I was talking about physical appearance.  "Looks," ya dig?

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."

Now John, I condescended, you *know* that's not a good criteria for determining
if you want to see someone again.  He said yes, to him it was, for the mere
reason that he's athletic in nature and likes to swim, ski, bike ride, hike,
and dance and is looking for a life partner to do those things with.  Her
interests were more in the way of crafts, cooking, and literature.  I argued
that they could always adapt each other's interests but he felt that if he
were to ask her to become more athletic, he'd be offending her.

Of course, if she asked him to become more literate she might offend HIM.

I saw his point, somewhat.  If I were looking for a mate (which I'm not)
I'd certainly be interested in someone with whom I have a lot in common
activity-wise.  Since this would be someone who enjoyed the outdoors and
recreational sports, a morbidly obese person would probably not catch my eye.
Maybe that's shallow and nose-in-the-air, but in that way "looks" are
important to me.

-Nance
-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
                            (_) \(_)
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 27 Sep 92 22:37:27 GMT
	<MARTINC.92Sep26115753@grover.cs.unc.edu>
	<1992Sep27.171448.11904@cs.ucla.edu>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: gds@oahu.cs.ucla.edu's message of 27 Sep 92 17:14:48 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.171448.11904@cs.ucla.edu> gds@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:

   In article <MARTINC.92Sep26115753@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
   >But get a clue, man!  The Gulch is *full* of programmers!  They're *all*
   >computer geeks just like you and me.  You've never *lived* until you've
   >watched some of the softball games -- they're almost as funny as Giants
   >games.

   This generalization is as bad as Ed's, and some of the others that
   have been posted here.  Doesn't it occur to anyone that there might be
   people who work as programmers during the day, but have hobbies and
   lesiure activities at night or on the weekends that they're quite good
   at?  For example, I knew some people who I played softball with who
   played in some of the high-level city leagues in the SF bay area.

Greg, baby, you're misplacing your quantifiers here: "some" of the
softball games doesn't mean that *every* *one* of the softball games was
funny.  (Hell, even the Giants had good days!)  

However, I can PROVE that *some* of the games were funny.

I was in them.
--
Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
H/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?"  _Leaves of Grass_ xxiii.4.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: wtr@mitre.org (Bill Ralston)
Subject: Re: Acceptance!
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 17:34:26 GMT

in article <1992Sep27.200811.22200@bmerh85.bnr.ca> myhui@bnr.ca (Michael 
Hui) writes:

>Or, you can be like me: take evening graduate-level courses while
>working full time, and even enroll in other undergraduate programs
>part time in another completely different field, only attending
>classes at night. I believe this is the best of both worlds.

Plus, you will be so busy, you will never even notice you don't have an 
SO, and won't have the time to look for one either. :)

Bill
---------------
wtr@mitre.org
** Marrou/Lord in '92.  If you don't know who they are, you are not an informed voter.  Fulfill your civic responsibility and find out!! **
** Opinions are mine only, and not my employer's **
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine)
Subject: Re: Exercise mania ( was: The great fitness debate)
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 14:14:25 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.022133.28365@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> hankd@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (Hank Dietz) writes:
>In article <MARTINC.92Sep30103840@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep30.025430.4896@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> hankd@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (Hank Dietz) writes:
>>   ... It might be
>>   true that exercise helps, but MODERATION is the key.  Overly intense
>>   exercise is a great way to do serious harm to yourself -- although the
>>   endorphins (spelling?) might make that feel good anyway.  ;-)
>>
>>Wow, the all-or-nothing crowd are really out in force today.  Everything
>>above is true -- and none of it contradicts the idea that exercise is
>>important to health.
>
>My mistake.  I didn't know "MODERATION" meant "all-or-nothing."
>
>Thank you for proving my point about EXCESSIVE EXERCISE being an
>obsession/addiction for some people....

Run, do not walk, to the farthest dictionary you can find, and look up
the following word: S-A-R-C-A-S-M.  And do avoid getting a heart attack
along the way.
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

Trying to be happy is like trying to build a machine for which the only
specification is that it should run noiselessly.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: Embarrasment of the Day
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 17:21:52 GMT

In article <1a29koINNltr@agate.berkeley.edu> epg@nature.Berkeley.EDU (little 'e' string) writes:
>In article <JMD.92Sep23153405@lion.bear.com> jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond) writes:
>>
>>In article <19p09vINNt81@agate.berkeley.edu> epg@nature.Berkeley.EDU (little 'e' string) writes:
>>   ObPremt: Or perhaps I just don't have the type of *figure* my
>>   accounting Prof is interested in. :)
>>
>>Of course, you are presuming that your accounting prof is interested
>>in female bodies more than he is interested accounting...
>
>Actually, my accounting prof is married and his wife is having their
>first child really soon.  He told us that he is planning on getting a
>beeper, and that if he rushes out of class on night, we'll know why.
>
>So I guess some things are more important to accountants than 
>accounting. :)

On the other hand, his tax year might end in September instead of the
more usual December.

-- Herb Huston
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Subject: Re: a new thread, see what you think....
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 04:54:51 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Oct1.175120.7902@ac.dal.ca> brentaa@ac.dal.ca (brent, eh?) writes:
>here's a couple of new threads for ya...
Of course, they're not new or anything, but not much around here is anymore :)

>O.K., so here's where it gets screwy...the girl then goes on a little trip
>for a couple of weeks or a month.  When she gets back, I get the feeling 
>that something has changed, but I can't put my finger on it....  She proceedes
>to string me along for a week or more, then comes up with the always
>popular `lets just be friends' line.  

Pretty simple, I think. She gets the opportunity to spend some significant time
away from you. Decides that she likes it. Takes off.
How to fix?
Give her (or your next her :) more space. Encourage her to take a day off or
two from the relationship. Don't be calling her every day. People need vacations
away from one another- even the closest couples I've known.
You'll find things to be much stronger that way, and not as easy to break
apart when she has to go away for a more extended period.
r.
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Bar/Club Scene
Date: 30 Sep 92 18:19:08 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1ab3j2INNgs1@golem.wcc.govt.nz> parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>In article <14851@auspex-gw.auspex.com>, johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
|>|
|>|IS YOUR FLY UNDONE???
|> 
|>Several years ago an old roommate talked my into going to the meat market
|>type singles place.  I was standing there, bored as hell, when a nice looking
|>lady came up to me and said, "You're looking good honey but you're fly is
|>open".  I just zipped it up and said, "I know.  Works every time.  What's
|>your sign?"
|
|<BARF!!!>
 
I'd have to say I got a slightly better reaction than that.  It was so
corny and spontaneous that she couldn't help but bust up laughing.  I 
caught her looking my way a couple more times, perhaps to see if my fly 
came undone again, and when I made eye contact she just started laughing again. 
She gave a nice friendly wave when I left.

Question: Was she laughing at me or with me?  

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira     | Auspex Systems | "Auspex does not share my opinions.  |
| johnf@auspex.com | Santa Clara CA |  So Why am I still working here?"    |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 18:47:16 GMT

 
In article <5561@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes
:
>
>Damn.  I seem to be losing posts.  I never saw this post in the original, 
>and I can't find it now.  (Actually, Charlie, it seems to be mostly stuff
>you've said.  Peculiar.)
>
>So, anyone say anthing interesting lately that I missed?  :-)
 
Oh, nothing too much--Charlie was mentioning the best way to get him hot
and bothered with a blow-drier (and why he no longer uses peanut butter
when using this technique); james dutton posted a fairly impressive .gif
of himself (you'll need 3-D glasses for the proper effect, though); 
Broward Horne posted a chapter from his upcoming book "New Approaches
to the Dating Game--How to Increase Your Batting Average in Seven Easy
Steps."  Stef talked a little about her new uzi and Dawn revealed one
of the more, ah, enviable physical traits of her ProblemYoungerMutant.
Some guy posted something about wanting to take you out for lunch on his
yacht, but I forget who he was; Dan Mocsny surfaced for a moment, but 
only to give us an update on the extensive training routine he has set
up for the Swedish Bikini Team; there was a brief discussion of everyone's
ten favorite erogenous zones; Emma Williams posted that she liked james'
.gif an awful lot and, in honor of her birthday, said she would post one
of her birthday suit; and Keith Garrard actually admitted that he thought
that Angelwing was hot.

Trygve   (Did I skip anything?)
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 29 Sep 1992 12:27:52 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <ewright.717696345@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>I have seen people -- friends of mine -- become dangerously depressed because
>of it (being told not to be sedentary)...

Exercise helps do away with depression.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Exercise mania ( was: The great fitness debate)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 20:55:39 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.


Hank Dietz writes:

>   It might be
>   true that exercise helps, but MODERATION is the key.  

And (Charles R. Martin) responds:

>Wow, the all-or-nothing crowd are really out in force today.  Everything
>above is true -- and none of it contradicts the idea that exercise is
>important to health.

A guy says that *moderation* is the key and Charlie accuses
him of being part of the "all-or-nothing" crowd.  And since
it wasn't me whose position he misstated this time, Charlie
can't even use the "you misstated mine first" line this time.
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Marriage
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:16:56 GMT
Distribution: soc.singles
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <90862@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>
>The new home and new car are totally irrelevant and replaceable.  A good
>mate isn't.
>
>The career is a tougher question.  I'd like to think that in this day and
>age, dual-career couples are workable.

In this day and age, dual-career couples are a requirement, especially if
you want that new car and new house.
-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira     | Auspex Systems | "Auspex does not share my opinions.  |
| johnf@auspex.com | Santa Clara CA |  So Why am I still working here?"    |
+==========================================================================+
Xref: sparky soc.singles:26418 soc.couples:3827 soc.women:17046 soc.men:16939
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.couples,soc.women,soc.men
Subject: Re: NEED IDEAS FOR FIANCE'S XMAS GIFT!!!
Date: 26 Sep 1992 10:24:10 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <92269.161744IK20050@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> <IK20050@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:
>Hi!  I'm looking for ideas on what to get my fiance
>for Christmas.  I want to something unique, something
>beautiful.....

Take your clothes off, put yourself inside some Christmas gift wrapping,
put a bow tie in front of your chest and lie down under the tree all night.
Keep the legs out so he gets a hint of what's inside when he gets up the
next morning.
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 28 Sep 92 13:00:49 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <ewright.717657953@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>Since I
>once let the wolf pack run me out of soc.singles, I decided that
>I'm not going to do it again.
>
>Of course, I'm sure that you and Charlie are completely willing
>to change your minds, right?  Oh, I see, you don't have to change
>your minds because you're "right."

Ed, this brings to mind something I've been wanting to ask you.  

Why do you like to read/post on soc.singles?  Please do not interpret this
as an attempt to 'run you out' of the group; you have as much right
to be here as I do, and it a sick sort of way your posts do make 
interesting reading.  However, you clearly feel that certain people
(chiefly Charlie, but some others) are out to get you for some reason,
and in general you seem to feel that the group is hostile to you and
your point of view.  Personally, I wouldn't want to hang around somewhere
if I thought many of the people there were malevolent and that they
disliked me.

One is forced to conclude you get some kind of satisfaction out of these
discussions.  But what kind?  I mean, Ed, assuming you can bury us all under
the weight of your prose, that we become so fatigued by your constant
and total noncomprehension that we finally give up and say, "Okay, Ed,
none of the reasons you can't get women to go out with you are your fault,
it's because the vast majority of women are sports-happy and not very bright,
and the 80 left over don't like your physique" (never mind that this is
not consistent with the experiences of anyone here)- just say that you
can get us to do this, what GOOD does it do you!?  Does God Almighty 
at last admit the error of his ways and award you a loving partner?

Ed, maybe you ought to think about why you're spending so much of your
time *here*, bitching, instead of spending it out there looking.  

					--Diamond

diamond@acpub.duke.edu |  "*Think* before you ask these questions, Mitch."
Elizabeth S. Abrams    |                       --Chris Knight
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine)
Subject: Re: Help, What Is Wrong With ME?(I'M NEW)
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 20:15:26 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

One thing for sure: you won't get any net.babes unless you trim your
.sig a bit.
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

Trying to be happy is like trying to build a machine for which the only
specification is that it should run noiselessly.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Best of Friends
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 05:56:38 GMT


HERE'S THE READERS' DIGEST VERSION, SPORTS FANS:


In article 718298601@convex.convex.com, ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>In <MARTINC.92Oct3150140@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:



>>But the real problem with this whole argument is that one cannot argue
>>*with* you -- one can only argue *at* you.
>
>>You don't read closely.
>

>Now, let me tell you a few of your vices.
>
>You waffle on your position.  You say something in one post,
>then appear to deny it in another, then reaffirm it in another.
>You refuse to allow yourself to be pinned down on anything.
>
>You lie.
>
>You lie about things I have said.
>
>You lie about things you said.
>
>You lie about things you said and then accuse me of misquoting you.
>
>You change the subject and then, when I make a reply on the original 
>subject, you interpret it in the context of the new subject and accuse
>me of misquoting you. 
>
>You lie so often you can't even keep track of what you've said. You
>are now telling lies that contradict yourself.
>
>You lie, and then when I catch you, you tell new lies to cover
>up your lies.
>
>>And for all the thrashing about that you do, you can't quite hide from
>>the fact that you feel like shit, and you are so frightened of the
>>threat to your identity that you can't risk change, even if it would
>>make you feel better.
>
>Thanks for telling me again how I feel, Charlie.  But once again,
>here are the unpleasant facts for you.  I'm proud of the way I
>live my life.  That's something that you can't say with a straight
>face.  Not in light of your repeated statements about how awful it 
>is that you don't exercise more.  You have allowed other people --
>the authors of that book you're so proud of -- to set your standards
>of self-worth.  I haven't.  And that's the one thing you really can't
>stand.


MORE ON THE NEXT READER'S DIGEST ABRIDGED POSTING.
From: jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Date: 2 Oct 92 17:53:48 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz writes:

>>
I wrote:
>>In defense of some of us, I like to run and work out - I do a LOT of both -
>>but other than that I'm extremely sedentary. For instance, today I ran twice
>>(4 and 10 mi), and worked out for an hour, and tonight I'll be goiing to a bar
>>and shooting pool and - gasp - drinking beer, in large quantity too.
>>That is to say, I work out but I'm no finess fascist.

parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz (Rachel/"Supergoof!") writes:
>What I meant was that wouldn't it drive you crazy if you wanted to jog
>together or something like that and your partner just wanted to veg out?

I'd never wish such an "unfun" activity on someone I care about. Most of the
crew I hang around with don't run or work out much, if at all. I'm the one
that takes all the abuse.

I'm scaring myself here - I'd hate to think I'm tolerant.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Aloysius McVeigh | "What do you want? Perfection?"
   jm0i@.Lehigh.edu     | "- or nothing. So you see, I take the nothing." (AR)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: brentaa@ac.dal.ca (brent, eh?)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: relationship gone to pot?
Date: 3 Oct 92 13:02:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: ac.1992Oct3.160242.7933
Distribution: na
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

In article <1992Oct2.223647.16308@netcom.com>, greg@netcom.com (Greg Bullough) writes:
> In article <1992Oct2.160621.7921@ac.dal.ca> brentaa@ac.dal.ca (brent, eh?) writes:
>>
>>P.S.    If you do dump him, I'm available, and I love to talk...... ;-)
>  
> Get back to the Nice Guys [tm] thread where you belong.
>  
> Greg

sorry Greg, Nice Guys[tm] are everywhere nowadays, there's nowhere you can
escape us.........HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
				-brontosaur the Nice Guy?    who knows....