HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gclapp@javelin.sim.es.com (Glenn Clapp)
Subject: Re: Tallllll women....
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:31:48 GMT

In article <Bu7H2I.CKF@tik.vtt.fi> pekka@tmt.tele.fi (Pekka Ahonen) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep3.182717.24436@javelin.sim.es.com>, gclapp@javelin.sim.es.com (Glenn Clapp) writes:
>>
>>>Aaah yes.  Tall women.  How would it be?  I know some, dated some.  Most
>>>of them that I know are in their teens!  (bummer).  The rest?  Not one
>>>thing in common.  I once told myself I'd only date >6 footers, then 5'10,
>>>now no such limits.  I have found the average and even shorter women to
>>>be much more fun (and more readilly available).  But... tall women... *sigh*
>>>
>>>Glenn
>>>6'10"  (209 cm)
>
>
>Hey, don't worry, maybe you'll get lucky as my friend who is about 200
>cm and he married a woman who is 140 cm!
>Now they've been married already 5 years and they seem to be happy.
>They don't have any kids tho', wonder why :-)
>
Now, that IS astounding!  A 60 cm height difference?  It seems that most
women I meet who "say" they like tall men are really talking about
6'2"  (188 cm) pip-squeaks.  Then when they meet me, it's all "well,
not THAT tall..."  They don't realize that us of suprerior stature can
wrap our arms around them twice. :)


>Someone asked if all the tall men are in US of A.
>There are also tall men (and women!) in Finland. I think that I'm
>about the average height (or perhaps a bit short) 183 cm.
>
Any of them have US visas?


Glenn



-- 
=============================================================================
= Glenn Clapp                          |  gclapp@thunder.sim.es.com         =
= Evans and Sutherland Computer Corp.  |  My opinions are my own, but then  =
= Salt Lake City, Utah  (801) 582-5847 |  that's my opinion.                =
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Subject: Re: chemistry / love at first sight : fact or fiction?
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 11:10:09 GMT

In <rawdon.716185224@cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:

>In <5220@news.duke.edu> infante@acpub.duke.edu (Andrew  Infante) writes:
>>trygve - how do you pronounce your name?
>>phonetically that is. ;)

>I think that he probably pronounces it "LOHD", as in "lodestone".

	Not if he is pronouncing it as the scandinavians would!
	Then it would be  "LOW - THE" or "LOW - DUH" depending on
	regional dialect!   And "trygve" should be "TRUIG - VUH".
	Of course, he may have anglicised it....

    ____________________________________________________________________
    |   Emma Williams            | Folk sover ellers ikke godt op      |
    |   ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie    | ad en sultan tiger!                 |
    |				 |    Steen og Stoffer :->             |
    |____________________________|_____________________________________|
From: taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Can you accept criticism ? (who cares why lurk ...)
Date: 15 Sep 92 05:08:39 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki, Finland

In <lwynlab.aahz@netcom.com> aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine) writes:
>No, you can't read people's minds, but if you can't follow the
>"standard" non-verval cues, you may well suffer some ostracization.

Ok, you thought this a step further than me.  I'd say that as long as
there isn't a common language for both persons involved they can't
communicate.  Some "standard" (yes, we Finns know the raised middle
finger sign too) non-verbal cues are often part of the language. 

Juha



-- 
Juha Taina | taina@cs.helsinki.fi | Phone: +358-0-708-4247
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Tallllll women....
Date: 8 Sep 92 23:12:24 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <myrnynj@lynx.unm.edu> hays@TECHNET.NM.ORG writes:
In article <1992Sep7.023328.29476@peponi.wcc.govt.nz>, parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz writes:
|>I fantasize about being able to wear heels and not feel like saskwatch
|>(remember him?)
|
|Uhhh, I'm pretty sure he usually didn't wear heels.  I'm not totally certain,
|since I've never actually *MET* him; I'm basing my guess on the pictures of
|his footprints that I've seen.
  
And I'm pretty sure that he didn't shave his legs, nor was he asked to 
do pantyhose advertisements.
 
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Larry 'Purple' Hays                                       hays@technet.nm.org
|
|   This would be a perfect place for a cute quote from "Harry and the
|     Hendersons", but sadly, I never saw the film.  I realize such
|      cultural ignorance is apalling and I apologize for my lack.
 
That's Ok.  I saw the film and can't remember any cute quotes from it.
-- 
+==========================================================================+
| 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: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Subject: Re: E.W. - Weddings....
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 14:43:50 GMT

In <1992Sep8.203930.15934@ryn.mro4.dec.com> tang@akofin.enet.dec.com (Gabe Tang) writes:


>re: (Emma Williams) 

>>............................................I made lots 
>>of new friends, including more single unattached males than I've
>>ever seen before in one place!  (Very unusual for Ireland where the
>>ratio of females to males is 3:1 )
>          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>	Sheeesh. Now why don't all these girls come over here to Boston.....
>	all their men do......and we're getting sick and tired of it!!! ;-)
>	They drink all the beer and wear out the dart boards but they won't
>	bring the women over......the nerve of these people!  :-{

	Dart Boards?? I've never yet met an Irishman who plays darts!
Are you sure you're not thinking of English men?  It's a national
pastime in Britain!
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Tallllll women....
From: parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 02:33:28 GMT
Reply-To: parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz
Organization: Wellington City Council, Wgtn, NZ

In article <7cln7j-@lynx.unm.edu>, blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>(on a related note, I remember one tall woman I dated who was overjoyed by
>the fact that she could wear heels and still feel good about it (ie- not feel
>like she was overwhelming her date, height-wise :) ).


Yes yes yes!  I can relate to that!  

I fantasize about being able to wear heels and not feel like saskwatch
(remember him?)

I lived with a guy for a year who was 6'4", but he was a total shithead.  I've
decided that tall isn't *that* important - nice, but not vital.



Rachel
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Blind dates scare me!
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:08:39 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <lbaap6INNb4i@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> smith@wesson.Eng.Sun.COM writes:
 
|Ha-uhh . . . the first one's a Financial Consultant and the second a 
|Computing Consultant.  Omigod!  Blow me down with a feather . . . that's 
|it!  No more dating with consultants 

Damn.

John "who used to be a computing consultant but doesn't own a black satchel"

|. . . or is it consulting with dates?

Better than seeking the advice from a prune.

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira     | Auspex Systems | "Auspex does not share my opinions.  |
| johnf@auspex.com | Santa Clara CA |  So Why am I still working here?"    |
+==========================================================================+
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Date: 15 Sep 92 23:38:50 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Sep15.223037.26673@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
|Trygve   (Actually, I did once have a guest who had a real thing for
|          driving Porsches in the mountains who might dispute your first
|          claim.  Personally, I thought it seemed rather uncomfortable,
|          but, hey, at least the shift knob survived intact.) 

As long as were talking about Porsches...

When My ex and I bought a 944 a few years ago she took it for a test drive
with the salesmen.  Rather than your standard round the block a few times
she hit the freeway and got off a few miles on a road that headed up into
the hills.  Since we'd had a sports car prior to that she knew how to drive
pretty well.  On the way back she had to stop at a gas station because the
salesman had gotten car sick.

"Men like women that know how to drive a stick."

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| 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: 11jcollins@gallua.gallaudet.edu
Subject: Which is worse??
Organization: Gallaudet University
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 03:21:31 GMT


Well, we've been hearing all this discussion about TALLLLL Women - so here's a
question just to give the thread a new twist:

Which is worse  A) being a tall woman? (..lets say around 6')
                B) being a short man?  (..lets say around 5')

                                    {Penguin}

P.S. Yes, I am short (5'2"), how else would I get the name {Penguin}?     
     (Then again I *do* waddle sometimes and I look great in a Tux!)

P.S. No height complexes here - I love the double-take I get when I go out with
     a lovely lass of 5'9" (without heels!)!!
From: liz@prc.unisys.com (Liz Loquacious)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Tallllll women....
Date: 14 Sep 92 23:00:51 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: Paramax Systems

In article <1992Sep14.164134.8352@linus.mitre.org>, wtr@mitre.org (Bill Ralston) writes:
|> in article <1992Sep11.142140.11720@gvl.unisys.com> liz@prc.unisys.com (Liz 
|> Loquacious) writes:
|> >
|> >You'll just have to come to the Boston Boink.  Looks like I'm gonna
|> >make it afterall!
|> >
|> >Liz Loquacious - guess I'll bring a skirt ;-)
|> 
|> Liz, you terrible tease, luring us drooling nerds to the Boink and then 
|> wearning pants all weekend!  :)

Well I didn't want things to get too out of hand ;-).  But, if you do
come to the Philly Boink...I promise ;-)

Liz Loquacious
From: ccspgo@gdr.bath.ac.uk (Paul Overend)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: E.W. - Musk, garlic, pizza and other smells....
Date: 11 Sep 92 13:30:40 GMT
Organization: Bath University Computing Services, UK

My girlfriend loves it when I wear either Paco Rabanne or Patrichs.  I don't 
know how she feels about any others as I don't use any others.  I stick to what
I know I like.

					Paul G. Overend
From: liz@prc.unisys.com (Liz Loquacious)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Boston Boink - Highlights
Keywords: Hairless Wonder, Police, Bananas
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:48:17 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Paramax Systems

In article <1992Sep15.162713.7107@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep15.155935.20581@gvl.unisys.com> liz@prc.unisys.com (Liz Loquacious) writes:
|> >
|> >Friday I can't post about.  I didn't arrive until the wee hours
|> >but one of the first things we did once we met up with Dawn and
|>  
|> Who's we? What time did you arrive?

Sorry, was that confusing?  I was talking about Saturday already; that's
when we, Bob Meyer (who planned this event and hosted the party), Gal Kaplan,
Liz (me), Sandra Loosemore, and Bill Ralston met up with Dawn, Peter, and
Alice.

|>  
|> >nerdy "man baby" jokes! :-)  Alice entertained as well and then
|>  
|> I love man baby jokes! Go on??????

Go on?  About Peter?  I'll leave that to Dawn.  She does the best job
describing him! :-)

|> Bob? Bob?

Meyer, Bob Meyer, see above!

|> I promise as soon as I sell my house and move into a bigger house a Boink
|> will occur.

Well, while I still have my bigger house and before I sell it for something
smaller I'm gonna have to have a Boink.  Not sure on when yet.  But we'll
get some pizza there if you show up James!

Liz Loquacious
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Heinlein
Date: 15 Sep 92 04:43:50 GMT
	<5328@news.duke.edu>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: diamond@acpub.duke.edu's message of 15 Sep 92 01:28:40 GMT

In article <5328@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:

   I was *going* to post a blistering response to this, but I think I'm too 
   tired. :-)  Anyone out there up to a Heinlein argument?  No, I didn't think
   so.  I'd even rather have another long discussion about why women never ask
   men out, actually.  

Ah, but they do.  I can prove it.  (Hey' guys.  Beth's, like, real cute.
And *boy* can she hold up her end of a conversation.)

   ("Hey, guys, how come women never ask *Heinlein* out?")

Uh.  Because he's dead?
--
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: aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine)
Subject: Re: Blind dates scare me!
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 18:41:58 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <29182@hydra.Helsinki.FI> taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina) writes:
>
>Is it a blind date when you meet someone first on the net and later in
>person?  What kind of experiences do you net-people have about such
>dates?

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but the ProblemOlderWoman is.....
uh, could you excuse me?  Thank you.
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

IRWTFM -- and that ain't fun
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C
Date: 9 Sep 92 18:41:50 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Sep9.102845.4852@sun0.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> c71@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de writes:
>
>	Well, this would further support the theory about the sexual
>hormones (pheronomes).  Presumably, you would be releasing them in
>abundance if you have just had sex and therefore would attract others
>to the smell without them realising why.  Moose do it!  Why do you 
>think theyr put musk in perfumes and aftershaves! ;>

To attract a male/female moose?  No, thank you.  Have you ever seen a
moose close up?  Appearance might not be high on my list for a relationship
but you have to draw the line somewhere.
-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira     | Auspex Systems | "Auspex does not share my opinions.  |
| johnf@auspex.com | Santa Clara CA |  So Why am I still working here?"    |
+==========================================================================+
From: jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Believe in youself, dammit! (was: Re: Singles Bar)
Date: 15 Sep 92 15:54:10 GMT
	<JMD.92Sep14184802@lion.bear.com> <rawdon.716526002@cs.wisc.edu>
Organization: Bear, Stearns & Co. - FAST
In-reply-to: rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu's message of 15 Sep 92 03:00:02 GMT


In article <rawdon.716526002@cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:

   In <JMD.92Sep14184802@lion.bear.com> jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond) writes:
   >It can be summed up in two words:  LOVE UNCONDITIONALLY.

   >I think a definition is in order: To love unconditionally is to
   >contribute without expectation of any reward, or credit, or even love
   >in return.  It is to love in the face of no evidence.

   No thanks.  I prefer not to love unconditionally.  I prefer to love to be,
   in turn, loved, and to have my trust in my partner not betrayed.  Love is
   not wholly altruistic, nor do I think that it should be.

I agree (as stated before) that a relationship in which one partner
consistantly gives more than the other is unhealthy.

Maybe that's the problem with the world right now.  Everyone wants
some kind of evidence for why they should love (I don't just
mean romantic love -- I also mean love of friends, family, all living
beings).  The problem is that there can never be enough evidence.

Would you want to be in a relationship in which the other person's
love for you was conditional?  Perhaps conditional upon your income?
Or upon your weight, or appearance?  Or upon your willingness to sleep
with them?  I think not.  I think that you would want to be loved no
matter what the circumstances are.

Someone once said (I think it was here in soc.singles a few years
back) that the ideal relationship is one in which _each_ partner takes
responsibility for 100%, not 50%, meeting the other half way.  This
may seem like a merely semantic difference, but I believe that the
attitude is different.  It means that the relationship will last
through thick and thin, even if one partner has to take up the slack
_for_a_limited_period_of_time_.

   If this is "the formula", then I will quite willingly remain single.  But I
   hope that this ain't "the answer".

You probably won't have a choice.  If you want a relationship, you are
gonna have to take responsibility for making it happen.  You will have
to take that risk -- the risk that you will end up giving and never
receive.  Sometimes, that will happen.  There will always be that
chance that your love will be in vain.  But this is no reason not to
love.  My belief (and experience) is that this willingness to risk is
what makes great relationships possible.


					Spidey!!!
					

--
 /\ \  / /\  Josh Diamond                              		   jmd@bear.com
//\\ .. //\\ AKA Spidey!!!                        ...!ctr.columbia.edu!ursa!jmd
//\((  ))/\\
/  < `' >  \          Beauty is the purgation of superfluities. -- Michelangelo
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu ("Broward "Layman" Horne")
Subject:      Brodney Beats on L.A.P.D
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 15:48:10 MST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA08298; Sat, 12 Sep 92 15:11:27 -0700
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA13601; Sat, 12 Sep 92 15:11:23 -0700
X-Received: from IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU by idbsu.idbsu.edu (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.2MX) with BSMTP id 0620; Sat, 12 Sep 92 16:10:45 MST
X-Received: from IDBSU (GCTHORNE) by IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 6530; Sat, 12 Sep 92 16:10:44 MST
X-To: soc.singles.usenet


       With a BASEBALL BAT!

       The L.A.P.D. is looking for me?
       Sorry, been there.
       Done that.

       Yo, baby, yo, baby John!  Of course I got laid.  I got laid
   months ago!  More importantly:

       Bip! Bip! Bip!  BEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPP!!!!
       We have lock-on!

       I'm absolutely astounded that I've been listed as MIA.  I mean,
   isn't that the whole POINT of this newsgroup?
From: stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Can we can the suck-up bit?
Keywords: encourage friendship?
Date: 7 Sep 92 02:23:23 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

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

>Still, the best compliments are paid in private (now if I can just get
>Bathsheba and Stef in private for a few compliments...).

trygve, what a courageous viking you are, to post this to a thread with the
subject line 'Can we can the suck-up bit.'

but I'm not to be outdone.

I'll come if Sheba does.

--
Stef                 Where am I going, and what am I doing in this handbasket?
stef@apple.com
From: stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Believe in youself, dammit! (was: Re: Singles Bar)
Date: 15 Sep 92 23:43:50 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:

>Hmm...perhaps the real answer isn't to avoid putting any feeling at all
>into it, but to put incrementally small amounts of feeling into it.  Let
>it build over time, subject to whether or not their feelings are also
>growing incrementally.

*applause*

Other keys to avoiding severe pain in relationships: be aware of
your expectations, be aware of the ways in which they might fail to be met,
know what situations are likely to trigger negative emotions, and allow
yourself to feel the negative emotions if they occur. (If you allow them,
they are more likely to pass quickly than if you try to shut them up.)

--
Stef					"One of us has to be a pragmatist."
stef@apple.com				"Nonsense!"
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: bill@wsuaix.csc.wsu.edu (William E. Johns;S23015)
Subject: Re: Losers of the world UNITE!!!
Keywords: Losers, World, People
Organization: Washington State University
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 01:04:11 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.005247.3340@panix.com> jis@panix.com (Jack Szwergold) writes:
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>READ ME READ ME READ ME READ ME READ ME READ ME READ ME READ ME
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>Do you notice certain activities growing when you have a lot of
>free time on your hands....
> 
After my separation.divorce I bought the biggest motorcycle I could ride.
Best purchase I ever made.

Ride Free,

Bill
________________________________________________________________
bill@wsuaix.csc.wsu.edu if you feel compelled to send email
johnsw@wsuvm1.csc.wsu.edu if you seriously expect an answer
AMA #500924   DoD #00314   WMTC #0002   SR= 2.125
Yamabeemer fjgs1200pdr100 740GLE  KotV KotRR KotD #0001  :-)
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

If you walk, just walk.
If you sit, just sit.
If you ride, just ride.

Above all, don't wobble.
                             Zen saying (slightly modified)
From: dy@depsych.Gwinnett.COM (Dr. Yes)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: intrinsically interesting topics?
Date: 10 Sep 92 16:32:11 GMT

gds@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:

> In article <c98gqB2w164w@depsych.Gwinnett.COM> dy@depsych.Gwinnett.COM (Dr. Y
> >I think people lurk in soc.singles because there really isn't
> >anything more intrinsically interesting than ways and means of
> >meeting and interfacing with MOTAS.
> 
> Hmmm.  One topic I have found interesting, of late, is why people
> decide to pursue certain types of careers, in light of available
> opportunities, the state of the economy, etc.  A side effect of this
> has caused me to become more interested in politics (at least, the
> relationship between government and the economy) than I had been
> previously.  I've also become more informed about business than I used
> to be.

Yes, that's interesting ... intrinsically interesting.

Besides, as I think about it I am sure I am wrong about ways and
means of meeting a MOTAS being the _most_ interesting.  Just think
about how few really brilliant people devoted much time to
studying it.

--
Still Using Waffle 1.64!    | Wafffle, QEdit and Webster's
                            | NewWorld -- one great menage a
                            | trois!
Newsgroups: soc.singles