HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome)
Subject: Re: Hey!
Organization: Net.Gypsy/ROM
Distribution: na
Date: 11 Nov 92 01:31:35 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.134801.5172@cbfsb.cb.att.com> (james.j.dutton) writes:
>In article <5671@jptcs.COM> tps@jptcs.com writes:
>>Julia Smith (jsmt@troi.cc.rochester.edu) wrote:
[dialog deleted and sent to a.r.c]
>
>   2.4


That high?

Allisson

-- 
allisson@turing.toronto.edu                            H. Allisson Roome
"Kindness is the beginning and end of the Law" - Hebrew Proverb
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Hints
Date: 12 Nov 92 05:57:56 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <JULIE.92Nov11191427@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu> julie@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu (Julie Wright) writes:

>Personally, I'm starting to wonder if Kiran's going out with the offspring
>of Elvis' love child and the ambassador from Jupiter with the prickly 
>feelers.  You know, the one Seth used to go out with, right after she
>amazed docs by giving birth to 19 cantaloupes.

Oh, my God, I thought I was her only lover.  Damn it, you just can't
trust illegitimate offspring of deceased rock stars and members of the
diplomatic corps of other planets.  

(And by the way, anyone who says they wouldn't date sculpture has clearly
never seen Rodin's 'Morning', currently located in the National Gallery.
Not only would I date it, I'd seriously consider asking for its hand in
marriage.)

				--Diamond

diamond@acpub.duke.edu |   The soul may choose its own society and shut
Elizabeth S. Abrams    |   the door, but the body gets thrown into bed
		       |   with the damnedest people.  --Peter Beagle
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: elections
Date: 6 Nov 92 15:44:28 GMT
	<15335@auspex-gw.auspex.com>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: johnf@Auspex.COM's message of 5 Nov 92 00:43:59 GMT

In article <15335@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:

   >Just think...  Clinton ends up doing a good job and gets re-elected.

   I think I'm going to be sick...

Relax, John -- either he does what his campaign promises say, is a
conservative Democrat with a relatively pro-business and economic growth
agenda, and cuts the deficit as well, in which case we come out all
right -- or he'll be another Carter, we'll be in deep shit in four years
and the Republicans will have a lock on the Presidency for your
lifetime.

Remember what Moynihan (sp?) said earlier this week" "Oh, shit -- now
it's *our* deficit."
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T
Xref: sparky soc.singles:30316 ba.singles:2111
From: marv@netcom.com (Marvin Raab)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,ba.singles
Subject: Re: Where to meet women?
Date: 11 Nov 92 04:06:36 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: user of Netcom Public Access Unix, SF Bay Area

In article <1992Nov11.015417.11404@netcom.com> kehoe@netcom.com (Thomas David Kehoe) writes:
>
>One of friends does something I haven't tried:
>borrow someone's baby (like your sister's) and
>go for a walk in the park or on the beach.
>My friend said that babies attract women like
>magnets.

A puppy works too.

BTW, back in DC, I was walking on the mall and came upon two women with 
a puppy. I spent an hour talking to one of them initiated with 'what a 
cute puppy!'

We did go out the following weekend but nothing ever came of it.



               -marvin


-- 
Marvin Raab                                  
marv@netcom.com                              Mountain View, CA 94040
apple.com!netcom.com!marv                    415-961-6501 (h)
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:06:55 EDT
From: Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: PRES DEBATE
 <lg0hdnINN1ge@news.bbn.com> <##cqfzk@lynx.unm.edu>
 <MARTINC.92Nov11181606@hatteras.cs.unc.edu>

Charlie, how is industrial waste in the atmosphere possibly a good thing?

How long do you expect that your descendants will want a habitable
planet?

(non-poluting industry is more valuable than the polluting kind -
surely someone can make money producing the re-tooling stuff?)

Graydon
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: That wacky electoral college
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 22:50:51 GMT

In article <720972460.23373@minster.york.ac.uk> aaron@minster.york.ac.uk writes:
[Description of British parliamentary system deleted]
>It all makes the US system seem much more egalitarian and much simpler as
>most of the important parts of our electoral system aren't written down.

Let's let bygones be bygones.  Want to apply for admission as three states?
(England, Wales, and Scotland; Northern Ireland is too much of a headache.)

-- Herb Huston
From: martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: PRES DEBATE
Date: 7 Nov 92 05:09:54 GMT
	<1992Nov2.155337.7689@cbnewsd.cb.att.com>
	<MARTINC.92Nov2172556@hatteras.cs.unc.edu>
	<1992Nov5.212607.13694@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: rridge@nyx.cs.du.edu's message of 5 Nov 92 21:26:07 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.212607.13694@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> rridge@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ross Ridge) writes:


   >but along the same lines, why isn't Carter stumping more for Clinton
   >-- he could be a wonderful spokesman for Clinton's economic plan.

   Probably for the same reason you didn't see Reagan "stumping" for
   Bush, they've both (more or less) retired from politics. 

Oddly, Reagan actually did quite a bit.

   >Disagree with the Republicans if you want -- but to demonize them the
   >way you do requires real ignorance.

   And you think your posting was any better? 

Ross, you silly twit, if I'm arguing that the Republicans aren't the
*only* ones who use dirty tricks or are sometimes less than ethical,
what do you expect?  Should I use hypothetical dirty tricks?   Should I
change the names to protect the guilty?

Or are you merely suggesting it's only bad if it's directed at people
you like?
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kelley@vet.vet.purdue.edu (Stephen Kelley)
Subject: Re: Teasing and other Games of Romance
Organization: Carps Underground, Screaming Willie Division
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 20:04:42 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.234058.19042@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome) writes:
-
- Well, I stuck my $0.02 in, I told her to be a tease.  Even more
- specifically, I told her to be a cock-tease (give a nickel, then
- promise a dollar and deliver ten cents).  Especially since she
- 
- I know it sounds cold and calculated but I could think of no
- other alternate advice.  Besides, it seems to be working for her
- 
- I realize that she's being deceptive and dishonest -- and that I
- told her to be.   But one of my two generalized rationales is
-
- Nathan Detroit and Miss Adelaide in "Guys and Dolls."  Actually,
- what I think is the crucial part is that it doesn't matter what
- she does as long as it works.
- 


Does she really want a guy so gutless he'll put up with this crap?

She is selecting and encouraging the worst possible traits in him
for the relationship.  She's worried that he only wants sex, so 
she twists her behavior to emphasize the importance of sex to him
in the hope that she will successfully manipulate him.

This goes beyond stupid, well into the realm of sick.

Steve Disgusted

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: PRES DEBATE
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:54:58 GMT

In article <MARTINC.92Nov8144706@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>In article <BxD5HK.Bn9@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>
>
>   In article <MARTINC.92Nov6105938@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>   >In article <ewright.720905707@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>   >
>   >   In <MARTINC.92Nov2172556@hatteras.cs.unc.edu> martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>   >
>   >   >Then there was Kennedy -- The one
>   >   >whose brother, Bobby, had been one of McCarthy's attorneys on the
>   >   >Communist witch hunts, but who he nominated for Attorney General anyway?
>   > What's so surprising about that?  Wasn't JFK the only Democratic
>   >   Senator to vote against McCarthy's censure?
>
>   McCarthy was condemned by the Senate, not censured.  
>
>That's essentially a quibble on a technical point of the Senate rules;
>he was certainly censured, even if he wasn't "censured" in the rules
>sense.
>
>   The vote was 67 to 22.
>   Seven Senators did not vote (only 48 states in 1954).
>
>   >I don't know one way or the other ... but if so, it's another of those
>   >interesting things.  One of those things that don't seem to be talked
>   >about since the Beatification.
>
>   Actually it has been talked about.  
>
>Not much, if a political junky like me hasn't run into it.

Well, I first heard about it a few years ago on a retrospective about McCarthy.
However, for the purposes of posting the article, it took me about 5 minutes
to verify it in the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_.

>   JFK was one of the seven.
>
>Was he absent or did he abstain?  If it was an abstention, isn't that
>almost the same?

JFK had planned to vote FOR condemnation and had drafted a speech explaining
why.  It was never delivered.  On the day of the vote he was in a hospital in
critical condition following back surgery.

Abstaining is not the same as voting for or against.

-- Herb Huston
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: markr@mot.com (Mark)
Subject: Re: Married Men
Reply-To: markr@mcil.comm.mot.com
Organization: MCIL
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:26:28 GMT

In article <lfei4fINN3ua@news.bbn.com> ahsiung@labs-n.bbn.com (Anita Hsiung) writes:
>Ever have the kind of conversation where what you said was perfectly
>innocuous and it didn't matter who was listening, but the nonverbal
>language was overpowering in its intent?  Sure, you discussed work,
>family and friends, but the eye contact, the smiles, the casual
>brushes against your hand, and just the intense concentration of your
>interchange made you breathless.

Of course.

>Well, I found out why I find married men attractive: they are relaxed.
>They know that "women like to be held", they're less obssessive than
>their single counterparts, and they're more willing to take the time
>to get to know you.

There are single men like that out there, I know, because I am one.
(often they are identified as Nice Guys (TM) :-(

Mark


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Subject: Re: PRES DEBATE
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:19:46 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <lg0hdnINN1ge@news.bbn.com> pdsmith@spca.bbn.com (Peter D. Smith) writes:
>The moral?  That action is premature.  Once the atmospheric models can
>predict the climate of the last century, I'll start to believe them.
>					Peter D. Smith

See, but you're ignoring the basic fact that >we only have 1 atmosphere<.
If it goes away, we can't just build another one, like a bridge.
Preventative measures, like reducing the amount of CFC restrictions, while
they're not absolutely proven, certainly as hell can't hurt, and evidence
is that actions like that will help.
What's the objection to reducing CFC's, or Methane, or to slow down de-
forestation?
Do you wait until you need an ambulace to go see a doctor?
r.
From: jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: girl/lady/female boy/guy/male
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:55:32 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University


>|> Better than dating a sculpture...

smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith) writes:
>HEY! WATCH IT BUD...SOME OF MY BEST FRIENDS ARE SCULPTURES.
>

What he said! And my favorite movies are "Mannequin" and "Mannequin 2"! So
watch it!
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Aloysius McVeigh | "In our mutual sincerity we might be able to show a
   jm0i@.Lehigh.edu     |  road to the salvation of America's very soul."
      "N.I.N.A."        |                                         - Malcolm X
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Hints (Was Re: What is attractive)
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:33:18 GMT

In article <96274@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
(Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.182033.9837@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
>
>>the child.  After attempting all routes I could think of to avoid the 
>>question, I had to answer and answer truthfully.  My answer consisted of
>>You know I love the baby very much, but the first year or two together is
>>always the hardest, because the people have to get to know each other, and
>>having a child can only complicate things.
>
>I'm confused here.  She had a child, and you broke up because you thought
>the child would complicate things?  Or -- she had a child, and you broke
>up because you wanted her to get rid of the child?  

I read it as, she broke up with him because he would have _preferred_
that she didn't have a child.  The child didn't prevent the
relationship, but she was apparently insistent on somebody who
preferred a woman who already had a child to a woman without one.

It's also not clear that she realized this.

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 22:53:17 EST
From: <WJB117@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: ISO MY PRINCESS

I AM LOOKING FOR A NICE WHITE FEMALE IN PENNSYLVANIA.   Between the ages of 20-
23 years old. I have brown hair, brown eyes, 6'2" big billed, and a junior in p
enn State university. My major is nursing so if your looking for that speacial
attention at any hour please send mail. I just might become your personal male
nurse. by the way here is a rose for you until you send me mail.
--------<--------<------<------<----<@
Until we type again. Love Bill
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine)
Subject: Where's the f*****g goddess?
Summary: Shhh!  Don't tell.....
Organization: Don't blame me, I voted for Bill 'n' Opus
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:02:43 GMT

In article <DANIEL.92Nov9164353@algol.clsi.COM> daniel@clsi.COM (Daniel Barclay) writes:
>> it off, but to be blunt, that's why the Goddess gave us hands and an
>I missed my mythology clue.  Who's the "Goddess"?  (From this and previous
>articles.)

Bitchy vampiric technogoth.
"Just where do you think you're going dressed like that?"
"Recycle those thighs"
"Just me"
"Where's the chicken?"
"Hardware consists of those parts reachable with a hammer."
"Have you ever used any free software word processors?"
"I before E, except after C, or when sounded like A, as in neighbor and
weigh, except for when weird foreign concierges seize neither leisure
nor science from the height of society. "
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

Who needs Lime Jello [tm]?  We had lasagna.....
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: WHAT DO AMERICAN MEN THINK ABOUT AMERI
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 20:27:50 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.150534.4809@cbnewsh.cb.att.com>, rfs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (richard.f.j.soyack) writes:
> In article <721567592.7444@minster.york.ac.uk> aaron@minster.york.ac.uk writes:
> 
> Ah accents, the only thing I've ever regretted about myself is
> that, being from New York City, I have no accent.

UH, do you have any bridges for sale??  :-{)

> 
> Have fun,
> Rich Soyack
> 



Larry Billings
*******************************************************************************
*    Sometimes I think it's a shame,     *                                    *
*    when I get feeling better,          *                                    *
*    when, I'm feeling no pain.          *   Should not have got on this      *
*    Sometimes I think it's a sin,       *   FLIGHT, TONIGHT.                 *
*    when I feel like I'm winning,       *                                    *
*    but I'm losing again.               *                                    *
*******************************************************************************

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith)
Subject: Re: That wacky electoral college
Organization: Gagging Sloth Records
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 13:52:33 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.210343.11462@adobe.com>, mmwang@adobe.com (Michael Wang) writes:
|> smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith) writes:

|> >How?  It seems to me that all the line item veto does is prevent Congress
|> >from stringing meaningless or downright bad items along with larger bills.
|> >The effect would be that when a bill goes before the president, it would
|> >be cohesive, logically. I don't understand how this could be bad.
|> 
|> But the Democrats aren't the only party submitting pork bills, the
|> Republicans do it too (although to a somewhat lesser extent), and the
|> President is not above playing party politics. If President Bush had a
|> line item veto, he could have vetoed all the Democratic pork items,
|> but left in the Republican stuff, and there would be no way to
|> overturn the veto.

WHAT?! NOT THE REPUBLICANS!

Of course they do, I don't think I said anything partisan. At least only half
of the worthless crap would get passed, rather than all of it.

Incidentally, I liked the amendment veto idea, although it still wouldn't solve
the problem you describe.

jds

***************************************************************************
                               * Health and knowledge and wealth and power,
Jeff Smith                     * Passion and poems and sex
smith@fl08-g.comm.mot.com      * I wear a smile like a leather glove,
                               * I won't shut my mouth for less.
                                                - shriekback
***************************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: mutation@dorsai.com (Florian Lengyel)
Subject: Re: How would *you* react?
Organization: The Dorsai Embassy +1.718.729.5018
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 07:33:47 GMT

tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
: In article <1992Nov4.192035.23785@tandem.com> leo@cpd.Tandem.COM (Leo Hejza) writes:
: >
: >I assume that, when you say, "has an attitude", you mean a woman who is
: >both physically beautiful, and emotionally secure, and emotionally
: >available.
: >
: >I'll bet it harder to find a person, (M/F), with both of those last
: >attributes, than it is to find someone who can be considered "a hot babe".
: 
: Naaah--the tough part is finding someone who actually wants someone
: emotionally secure and emotionally available.  After all, where's the
: challenge in someone who is emotionally available (you can't even be
: the one to "rescue" him or her) or the excitement in someone who is
: emotionally secure?  Sure, they might sound good on paper and some 
: people will say that they're looking for someone with those qualities,
: but how many actually find emotionally secure and available people
: interesting romantically when they do meet them?

there's some truth there, but I have to say that if you don;t find
emotionally secure and available people interesting when you meet them,
then give them some time. There's the possibility that they may not
find you that interesting, or worse. Or they might, but like other
emotionally secure people who are available, they don't have to
be interested right away.

Being emotionally secure does not have to be so innocuous as you make out.
I think there is considerable room for challenge in achieving some kind
of emotional security for oneself, let alone finding it in others.

If you don;t think emotionally secure and available people offer you any 
romantic challenges, then try seducing one. Try finding out if you
are as emotionally secure as they are. I think I hit on it.

You're scared!
: 
: Trygve   (Of course if it seems like you're only meeting people who
:           aren't emotionally secure and available these days, it's
:           because they're being bred out of the gene pool....)
-- 
MUTATION@DORSAI.COM
FLORIAN@NEOTERIC.COM
Xref: sparky soc.singles:30458 ba.singles:2142
From: gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,ba.singles
Subject: Re: YKYBRNTLW.... (Re: Where to meet women?)
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:38:12 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)

In article <1992Nov12.041104.8421@wetware.com> diana@wetware.com (CatWoman ) writes:
>
>You have obviously NOT been paying attention.
>
>We ProblemOlderWomen can only get the title
>when we want sex MORE than our ProblemYoungerMen...
>
>THAT is the Problem!!!
>
>Diana
>(the ORIGINAL ProblemOlderWoman)
      ^^^^^^^^

You mean Drieux's written a cp for POMs???  Wow.

Hey Drieux!  Can I get the source?  :)


-- 
 .------------------------------------------------------------------.
 |  Greg Andrews   |       UUCP: {amdahl,claris}!netcom!gerg        |
 |                 |   Internet: gerg@netcom.COM                    |
 `------------------------------------------------------------------'
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: dating
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 18:06:37 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Keywords: dating for men and women
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.

In <1992Nov5.001030.26366@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu> efroyman@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Ella Froyman) writes:

>CALL THE   MCE DATELINE 
>              $2.00 FIRST MINUTE
>                SO CALL NOW...............

Hell will freeze over first, thanks.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
"I get so tickled debunking bad personal philosophy." - Milquetoast
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jdnicoll@prism.ccs.uwo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: Do you remember 1970 to 1980?
Organization: University of Western Ontario, London
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:34:48 GMT


	Hmmm. Nationally,  it would  be  the October crisis with the FLQ
kidnapping Laporte  and  whoever, PET  (Canada's Studmuffin-in-charge)
declaring  martial  law, the  forces of Law'N'Order arresting zords of
innocent  (wrt the FLQ) people and the press rolling  over  and moaning
for more. I  don't  recall if the one  ex-FLQ terrorist who  later was
employed by the Quebec government still works there.

	Personally,  I'd say  it  was  the time I seriously  injured
myself playing croquet, in front of some attractive women I was attempting
not to  look like a  nerd to.

						James Nicoll