HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jodar@girtab.usc.edu (Nicholas Jodar)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Date: 7 Apr 1992 04:41:01 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: world,soc
NNTP-Posting-Host: girtab.usc.edu
Summary: It's a personal choice....
Keywords: Scruples

In article <1992Apr7.005929.11543@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> rnjx@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:

>The question is this.  Is it ever morally and/or ethically O.K. to actively
>try to woo one member of an existing relationship from that relationship so
>that you may start one with her/him?  Under what circumstances?  How about
>pursuing someone who's engaged?  Where do you all draw the line?  If it isn't
>O.K., would you still do it anyway?
>
>#  RNJX@vax5.cit.cornell.edu                                 #             
>#  Jeff Wilson                                               #

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.'
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: 15 Apr 92 20:46:39 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogo.corp.sun.com

In article <15APR199212081014@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov> afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes:

>Oh, by the way, Teresa received a *really* abusive e-mail reply on this 
>thread.  I packed it up and forwarded it to the postmaster at the site it 
>came from, but in the mean time send her some hugs... it was really nasty.

Can I post it?  Pretty please??????
--
Ed Carp                                      415/336-0797 (work)

++ UNIX  SysAdmin, Systems  Programming  Services,  Utilities ++
++ and Programmer Productivity Tools                          ++
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Subject: Re: A Question for Females
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 20:24:52 GMT

In article <92106.14485232DPO6T@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> 32DPO6T@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU writes:
>
>     In response to the question you asked, I just have to tell you that I as a
> female would love to get involved with a friend.  Think of all the advantages,
>1) you already know the person.  2) You most likely feel comfortable with the
>person, of you wouldn't be friends with them.  I do know, however, that
>relationships with friends are more trouble then they are worth.  If you do
>go out with someone who you were first friends with, and you break up for some
>stupid reason, you're out of a relationship and a friendship.  This is the way
>I've lost many friends.  In my estimations, it makes more sense to be friends.
>I hope you can understand where we're (women) are comming from.


I have had (approx. 3) relationships with women who were initially
friends.  For whatever reasons, we added the sexual relationship
to our friendship.  In all cases, it enhanced the friendship.  In
all 3 cases, the sexual relationship ceased after a period of time,
but the initial friendship continued.  Guess it can work for some but
not for others.  Probably the reason it worked for me is because it
was a mutual decision to begin, and a mutual understanding for it
ending.  But it did help make us even closer as friends.

				Steve
				
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.couples,soc.singles
From: afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison)
Subject: Re: lying to oneself (was Re: Sanctity of relationships)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Ancient Souls Inc.
Distribution: world,soc
Date: 10 Apr 1992 16:53 EST  

In article <1992Apr10.160829.12732@beaver.cs.washington.edu>, 
dbj@cs.washington.edu (Dave Johnson) writes...
>In article <1992Apr9.180643.26083@hemlock.cray.com> robd@cray.com (Robert Derrick) writes:
>>Stephen writes:
>>: (Meloney Cregor) writes...
>>: > I wrote:
>>
>>	[that it is difficult in the extreme to really lie to oneself,
>>	 maybe close to impossible for a sane person]
>>
>>    [Meloney, and Stephen, et. al., disagree in the extreme!]
>>
>>Well, kids, [son, mom, sis, etc], I am far from being a Pollyanna, and
>>yes, I have lied to myself, and perhaps you have too.  But did I believe
>>it?  I Don't Think So!  Did I try to believe it?  You bet.  Could I have
>>succeeded?  Maybe.  But every doggone time I take an honest look at
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>myself, the lies stick out like hammered thumbs.  I just can't hide 'em.
> ^^^^^^
>Stephen, 

BBBBZZZZZZZTTTTT ! Nope, sorry Dave, but thank's for playing.  Actually,
DERRICK said all the above, not me.  Look for insightful information, 
stinging sarcasm, and biting satire and *that* will be mine... oh, and
*s**tloads* of asterisks ! :-) :-)

Try to keep the attributions straight, please. I catch enough grief for the 
things I *do* say ! :-)

-- 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.
From: hjanssen@cbnewse.cb.att.com (hank janssen)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: a question  (AN ANWSER, Not even a smartass one:-))
Date: 6 Apr 92 19:59:25 GMT
Organization: AT&T

From article <1992Apr6.134409.1@runt.appstate.edu>, by grs01153@runt.appstate.edu:
> Some smart ass responded to my question with something about a jack in the box.
> Well perhaps I should ask it again. What exactly constitutes cheating on someone
> with whom you are in a relationship?.....I am asking because I am curious...I
> realize everyone has a different definition, but it will be interesting to see
> the differences and similarities between (among?) parts of the country and
> sex...-- 
> And to the smart ass, I hate to call you names, but I call a spade a spade, to
> continue your earlier card thread.....
> 
> `'Shannon Frady                                     |     This is not         `'

I wasn't the smartass, 
But you migh interped the next as beeing a smartass remark.

If you have to ask what cheating is, don't you already know the anwser
to it.???

No seriously, what is cheating.?? 
Is  it  cheating  when  you  look  across the street to a good looking
male/female (depending on your gender) why  you  have  a  relationship
with somebpdy else.???

I would think that is kind of steep.

I would consider it cheating if:
1) The person that you are having a relationship with is spending more
time with somebody of the opposite sex than you.  (Even  if  they  are
suppose to be only friends)
2)  Goes  out  on  a  date  more than once with the same person of the
opposite sex. 
3) Sleeps, (you would have never guessed) with somebody else.
4) Does anything seriously physical with the oposite sex.
5) Is more open in converstation with the opposite sex than with you.

(Just to name a few)

I could go on, but i am sure that the above is enough  to  spark  some
flame of some sort. :-)

Just my debt's worth.....



-- 
---------------------------------------------------+-------------------
                  Hank Janssen  (CPU)              | REMEMBER: 
                  att!ihlpb!hjanssen               | It is better 
			                           |      to burn out,
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.couples,soc.singles
From: mcregor@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Meloney Cregor)
Subject: Re: lying to oneself 
Organization: Dept. of Psychology, Univ. of Illinois, Urbana
Distribution: world,soc
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 14:38:44 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.180643.26083@hemlock.cray.com> robd@cray.com (Robert Derrick) writes:


>yes, I have lied to myself, and perhaps you have too.  But did I believe
>it?  I Don't Think So!  Did I try to believe it?  You bet.  Could I have
>succeeded?  Maybe.  But every doggone time I take an honest look at
>myself, the lies stick out like hammered thumbs.  I just can't hide 'em.
>Of course, I could be lying to myself now, but I doubt it.  And then,
>how would you know?

Well, bully for you.  The disagreement wasn't with whether *you* did this
but that you didn't believe people do this.  They do.  And yup, they
sure as shinola believe it, hook, line and sinker.  I will not go in to
all the gory details of each instance.  You can choose to believe or not,
it makes no difference to me.  You'll find out soon enough, I'm sure, if
you live that long.


Xref: sparky alt.romance:7221 soc.singles:11449
From: jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:59:53 GMT
Reply-To: jsp@pls.amdahl.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes:

}In article <89El02o5c9Kk00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jsp@pls.amdahl.com writes:
}+You missed the point, guy.  As I've tried to make clear in a few other
}+postings, my feelings have nothing whatsoever to do with viewing women
}+as property.  The point is that a person ACTIVELY trying to mess up an
}+existing relationship is showing a lack of respect for the relationship
}+and for BOTH of the people in that relationship.  Asking someone out

}So I suppose barging into some guy's house and demanding that his
}wife make a choice between her husband and me is out of the
}question.

}Note the tone of voice.. and the implied possessions.

}It's wonderful to be both moral and never been involved in
}relationships which force one to evaluate one's own behavior and
}stated morals.

Call me dense, but I have absolutely no idea what you're saying.  Maybe
the problem is that I can't note any tone of voice from typed characters.
And I have no idea what implied possesions you are refering to.

Does that last paragraph really mean to assume that I have never been
in such a position?  You're wrong if that is what you meant.

--James Preston

Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: hoff@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Wildfire)
Subject: Re: Ed and Teresa (Carp ????)
Keywords: Let's mind our own business
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 17:24:09 GMT

afdenis@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes:

>In article <1992Apr11.093743.10544@willamette.edu>, ppinkard@willamette.edu (Patrice Pinkard) writes...
>>I think we should let Ed & Teresa work it out between the two of them.  What
>>do you think?  It doesn't REALLY involve anyone other than E & T. 
>> 

>I dunno, if it works out right it should *also* involve some T & A and 
>maybe even a little S & M. :-)

>.. `initially'. {URP}

>-- Stephen 

E & T....is that anything like ET? Ya know, I never did understand why
he was called ET the Extraterrestrial.  After all, isn't that what ET stands
for in the first place? But I digress.... ;)
Besides....if they didn't want our help they would be doing this by email....
(unless of course they already are, but that takes all the fun out of it!!)

				-Wildfire-

-- 
 And the seeds of love were sown   <>                   -Wildfire-
 And nurtured with desire          <>             hoff@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
 And when they started to grow     <>           lmh44500@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
 They grew like WILDFIRE!          <> Disclaimer:  Who ME?!?!?! (innocent look)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: Pamela Kay <szafrans@copper.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: Romantic music list
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 19:13:56 -0500

>       Okay, folks, here's a new concept for this net.  I've read a lot of
>complaints about how this has turned into a "bitch.net" about how men are
>assholes and women are bitches and nobody can get along with anyone and no
>one can get anyone else to be interested in them . . . . and this is
>supposed to be a net about romance.
>        Well, here's something new to chew on for a while.  The songs listed
>here are ones which, I've found, tend to be really good for "setting the
>mood" on that special occasion.  Most of them, for me, have been used to ask
>that special someone to slowdance with me.

Outside of all the "love songs" that float upon our airways today,
my favorite (thanks to a wonderful music education by my dearest husband :)
are more "newage" type musical selections.

The most personally romantic music that I can think of is by Michael
Hedges.  We often played it late in the evening when I was expecting
our first child.  We would just lay together, feeling the baby move, while
we listened to Michael's music.  We recorded the album and played it in the 
operating room (C-Section :( during his birth.  I remember actually
catching myself singing some of the lyrics with the tape as our son
was born.   It really helped make a rather tense experience so much more
relaxed. The anethesiologist still uses it for this :)..he liked it so much :)

Now that we are expecting our second child together, we find ourselves
heading back to Michael's voice :)...soo smooth.  I suspect we will 
bring our recording in again with us :)

Pam
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: Stananktity of relationships
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 18:12:26 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.155141.5381@spool.cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu writes:
>In <1992Apr8.203913.3320@cbfsb.cb.att.com> jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr8.173620.19757@ultra.com> stcroix@ultra.com (Bill St. Croix) writes:
>>>Excuse me???  Excuse me...if you ask someone out, who is in a relationship
>>>and they say yes, you are responsible for breaking them up.  Odds may be
>
>>EXcuse me doofuss, 
>
>Good word choice there, by the way.
>
 
My pleasure.
 
>>		    if you ask someone out, who is in a relationship
>>and they say yes, their ex is responsible for not providing a fulfilling
>>relationship. 
>
>I don't agree.  I think that the bulk of the responsibility is hers for
>saying yes.
 
Actually I agree, but I'm trying to start a flame.
 
>
>By the way, people, as long as we're sitting here laying "responsibility"
>and "blame", I contend that such concept are irrelevent unless there is
 
The concept isn't (thanks Richhh) the only thing irrelevent about this thread.
 
>some "punishment" (or other Bad Thing) which happens as a result of the
>actions we're discussing.  So, what sort of bad events do people have in
>mind that happen which someone must take "responsibility" for?
>
>-- 
>Michael Rawdon
 
Having your bare butt spanked, repeatedly, excessively, repetitively,
over and over comes to mind. Whadya think Lar?
 
>No optimistic outlook survives contact with the human race.
 
Word's to live by. I like it.


Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.couples,soc.singles
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: lying to oneself (was Re: Sanctity of relationships)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 01:18:40 GMT
Distribution: world,soc
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <intrigue.702863510@milton>  intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing) writes:
>
> Angelwing -  I have *enormous* hooters!  Honest!  [I lie real good]

Really?  Then you must lie on your back...

(You really didn't expect me to not go for those, err, that, did you?)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Xref: sparky alt.romance:7074 soc.singles:11266 soc.couples:2121
From: markf@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Mark Friedman)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Do You Remember - early '60s edition
Date: 16 Apr 92 22:10:25 GMT
	<1992Apr14.194624.7275@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com>
	<1992Apr14.233824.8673@morrow.stanford.edu>
	<1992Apr15.191857.8294@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
	<RMELVIL.92Apr16081045@hughes.hacgate.UUCP>
Reply-To: markf@zurich.ai.mit.edu
Followup-To: alt.romance
Distribution: usa
Organization: M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab.
In-reply-to: rmelvil@hughes.hacgate.UUCP's message of 16 Apr 92 15:10:45 GMT

In article <RMELVIL.92Apr16081045@hughes.hacgate.UUCP> rmelvil@hughes.hacgate.UUCP (Richard Melville) writes:

** In article <1992Apr15.191857.8294@cbfsb.cb.att.com> joni@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (joni.dunlap) writes:
** 
** >   what about spider bikes with sissy bars and banana seats ?
** >   Joni :)
** 
** I thought it was monkey bars and banana seats...

Monkey bars are (were?) those things in playgrounds  that you climb
over, around and through.

-Mark
--

Mark Friedman
MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
545 Technology Sq.
Cambridge, Ma. 02139

markf@zurich.ai.mit.edu
Xref: sparky alt.romance:6965 soc.couples:2064 soc.singles:11021
From: oldman@coos.dartmouth.edu (Prakash Das)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.couples,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Date: 12 Apr 92 01:09:13 GMT
Distribution: world,soc
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <1992Apr8.111700.4735@hemlock.cray.com> robd@cray.com (Robert Derrick) writes:
>Jeff Wilson ask:
>
>: The question is this.
>
>
>My solution:  if you feel it is right and correct, and you are
>	willing to accept all of the consequences, then do it.
>
>	      if you feel it is wrong, as your post clearly 
>	indicates, then to follow through will also be wrong for
>	you.  you will not ever be a better person for it.
>
>but,
>	      if you are not sure, the most likely scenerio, then
>	make a decision and stick by it, and accept it and be
>	proud of it.  if not the result, then at least the fact that
>	you made a decision.  there are so many people who will
>	spend their lives alone for want of a decision to try.
>
>and so, two short stories:
>
>	make a pretty good couple.  they are married, and i hope,
>	happily struggling thru life (i know they are struggling,
>	but without struggle, you are already dead).  i am better
>
>...
>
>	the floor, and said "i'm sorry.".  and my daughter looked
>	him straight in the eye and said, "sometimes sorry's not
>	enough", and she turned and left.
>	once you decide to break something, be sure you will be 
>	prepared to forego forgiveness.
>
>
>rob derrick

The most sensible answer to the original question! I agree completely.

-PD
From: afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Ed and Teresa (Carp ????)
Date: 16 Apr 92 21:56:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: lims02.16APR199216563964
Organization: Ancient Souls Inc.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <16APR199216271974@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov>, aatresa@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Teresa Kline) writes...
>In article <1992Apr16.183847.27993@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, hoff@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Wildfire) writes...
>>afdenis@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes:
>> 
>>>Well, that's 5 `for' and 2 `against'... all votes in ?? :-)
>> 
> 
>Plus a few that were e-mailed...I don't have the separate count.  I'll get 
>it 

.. no, you're a *blond* !!! You'll *never* get it ! :-)


>...if you want it, Stephen.

.. was it *nasty* of me to break this line out of context ? :-) :-)


-- 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
From: pope@physics.su.OZ.AU (Michael Pope)
Subject: Re: Newbie ... Please Don't Flame.
Organization: School of Physics, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 04:03:22 GMT

>In article <1992Apr9.020415.27307@acsu.buffalo.edu> bentkopj@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Paul J. Bentkowski) writes:
>>Hello Folks;
>>	
>>	I know I might be new to this news group, but what is it
>>	about... What topics do you discuss ... Is it to learn
>>	about Romance or develop Romances, etc...
>>
>>	My questions might be simple and foolish but please bare 
>>	with me.
>>
>>	Thanks.
>>
>>Paul.

Well, this group is to discuss all sorts of things really, to do with
romance and whatnot.  If you want advice or suggestions about first dates,
presents, etc.  If you have some inspired poetry, if you've just had a bad
break up and want to whine to a few sympathetic ears and so on.  Read a few
posts and see what you think.


Mick....

Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison)
Subject: Re: love songs
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Ancient Souls Inc.
Date: 15 Apr 1992 12:40 EST  

In article <shepfINNomk@agate.berkeley.edu>, ronan@codon3 (Karen Ronan;161 GPBB;x2-0884) writes...
>Haywire writes:
>>Why is it when your trying to heal a broken heart by listening to the radio
>>all you hear on the radio is love songs...???????!!!!!!!!!
>>Its really annoying....
> 
>Because love songs sell products

Yup... guns ... knives ... poison ... sleeping pills ... alcohol ... not to 
mention the *illegal* trade they elicit.

:-)

-- 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
From: aatresa@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Teresa Kline)
Subject: Re: Dealing with unreturned love
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Yeah, *right* !
Date: 17 Apr 1992 08:07 EST  

In article <1992Apr16.174827.11767@vax5.cit.cornell.edu>, reyy@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes...
>Greetings,
Earthling...I couldn't resist, working at NASA. :)

>But just recently I
>was thinking about the whole situation, and realized that
>the reasons I thought Sherry gave for not dating me cannot
>be valid.  (i.e. afraid of losing a friend).

Feelings are fleeting and transitory things sometimes...especially when 
you're still in college with all the changes going on in your life then.  
What she said to you about losing a friend could have been true *at that 
time*.  Later she might have changed her mind.

You *could* also take it as a compliment, although that's easy for me to 
say to you, and hard for me to do in my own life.  It could be that she 
values her *friendship* with you more highly than she valued the friendship 
with Joe.  She doesn't want to risk losing *your* friendship by dating you, 
but was perfectly willing to risk Joe's.  Make any sense?

> 
>So anyway, I'm crushed.  Is it alright if I feel a little
>uncomfortable around her and Joe?  

Any feeling you have is all right.  What you *do* about them is where the 
trouble might come in.   

> 
>What do I do now?  Do I tell HER how I feel?  Sometimes
>I'm afraid I tell her more than she wants to know.
>I don't know, I'm just very confused.

It sounds like you've told her how you feel about her.  Have you (all three 
of you) talked about what you *all* feel now?  If you go after her, you 
might lose Joe *and* Sherry.  If you bottle it all up inside, you'll poison 
yourself with the resentment, which will also hurt your friendships with 
both of them.  Maybe you should all talk about what you feel.  Not that you 
are crazy about Sherry, but that you *are* uncomfortable around them 
because you were interested in Sherry yourself. 

-- Teresa

		Life -- just for the FUN of it!!!!
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples