HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Date: 7 Apr 92 17:35:42 GMT
Reply-To: jsp@pls.amdahl.com
Distribution: world,soc
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

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?

No.  Unequivocally it is never, ever ok.  If you know that the other person
is in a relationship, then you are scum if you lift one little finger to
try to damage or break up that relationship.  Obviously, if you don't know 
that a person is involved, you aren't doing anything bad by wooing someone
whom you think is unattached.  But the second you find out otherwise, you'd
better back off entirely.

Other posters have tried to mitigate this by bringing up situations where
you "know" that the relationship is wrong for the other person, or you
"know" that the other person is only involved because of some falling out
with you.  None of that gives you the right to decide what's best for
another person.  If you think someone is making a mistake, you of course
have every right to make your opinion known.  But there is a big, big 
difference between saying, "I think you're making a mistake here", and
saying, "Drop this guy and come away with me because I love you more and
I'm better for you."  The former is just giving your honest opinion; the
latter is actively trying to entice the person away from the existing
relationship and toward you.  And that makes you scum.

--James Preston
From: tjg01@thdhub.UUCP (Terry Gardner)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: LOVE sucks. No question about it.
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:19:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Home Depot, Inc.

praetzel@tesla.waterloo.edu (praetzel@tesla.waterloo.edu) writes:
: In article <1992Mar31.222556.26258@cbnewse.cb.att.com>, hjanssen@cbnewse.cb.att.com (hank janssen) writes:
: Yup.  It sucks.  Do yourself a favor and give it up before it kills you.

Only if you're lucky....
-- 
Terry Gardner, terry@thdhub, terry%thdhub@uunet
Senior Network Systems Programmer @ The Home Depot, Inc.
404-433-8211 x 5124 Message Generated with GNU Emacs 18.58...
Aborting, Retrying, Failing, and Ignoring.....
From: csuat@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Pete "Ganders" Favelle)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: I would like some advice.....
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:46:00 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, Warwick University, UK
Originator: csuat@lily


on 8 Apr 92 15:06:00 GMT,
blackbourner@bvc.edu said:
>> 	One side of me says:  Just continue to be friends and if anything
>> 			      happens, it will happen naturally.
>> 
>> 	The other side says:  Why not say somethng?
>> 
>> 
>> 	I think I opt for the first side, but I'm not certain.
>> 
>> 	Anyone got any ideas.....e-mail would be good...but equally so would
>> 	here on the group.
>> 
>> 	Brendan.
>> 	is_b420@kingston.ac.uk

>     I say continue to be friends. If something develops, great! If not, you 
> won't have lost  a friend.

> Erin Sue

It really depends on how good your friendship is. If you think that you could
remain friends if you said something and nothing came of it, then I'd say
something.

(sorry - that means one post each way :-)

Hugs,

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

-- 
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<
#	     cstxqcv@dcs.warwick.ac.uk / csuat@csv.warwick.ac.uk	     #
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: rna@leland.Stanford.EDU (Robert Ashcroft)
Subject: Re: Ed and Teresa
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 02:41:08 GMT

In article <10APR199208131278@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov> aatresa@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Teresa Kline) writes:
>In article <ku9rhlINNfok@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>, erc@pogo.Corp.Sun.COM (Ed Carp) writes...
>>Hey!!!  Wait a minute!!!  WHEN did you ask me out on the net???????
>
>Better m/g and reread the last week or so, Ed.  Apparently you missed it.  
>Boy, I thought you paid special attention to anything with my name on it.  
>Ignore my last post...you actually never did answer me, you answered a 
>*gentleman* from Australia when he said *he'd* take me instead.  Now if I 
>could only remember his name....I've got it here somewhere.....
>

By the way, I'd just like to point out that this proves (in fairly
spectacular fashion I might add) that some women _do_ have the guts
to make the first move.  Too bad that the guys they ask don't have a
clue, eh Ed?

Fine display of intestinal fortitude, Teresa...

RNA


Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: prabal@pons.cis.ohio-state.edu (Prabal Acharyya)
Subject: Re: I would like some advice.....
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Computer and Information Science
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 06:26:13 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.122514.16826@kingston.ac.uk> is_b420@kingston.ac.uk (Brendan Rooney) writes:

>	To be honest I'm quite fond of her but I not sure about telling her
>how I feel about her.  She has met a guy recently whom she seems happy about
>and so now I don't want to say anything in case she then asks me "to leave her
>alone" or something like that.
>  
>	One side of me says:  Just continue to be friends and if anything
>			      happens, it will happen naturally.
>
>	The other side says:  Why not say somethng?


I think knowing somebody over 3-1/2 years tells that both of you want
to be friends to each other.  You must have been thinking about the
"other side" for quite sometime, otherwise you wouldn't have posted
for advice.   Its your ownself telling you that pursuing what "other
side" suggests might end up in "loosing her" totally.  

Now you need to decide for yourself what you would want from her.
_Just_ Friendship, occational mail, you go to social gathering alone
while she introduces you to her SO.  Or you would like to spend quiet
evenings with her alone, walking in a park, strolling with her in the
woods.  Laughing, talking, sharing intimate details of your life, and
I can go on.  If you want the later part, go with what your "other
side" is saying.  It may be that she is waiting all along for you to
say something like that.  But then again you can wait for eternity to
somebody to turn the wheel (I mean what your "One side" says about
natural course of action - like rocks becoming soil, trees turning
into coal etc :-)

Go for it Brenden, and good luck. 

Prabal.

Xref: sparky alt.romance:6923 soc.couples:2042 soc.singles:10940
From: robd@cray.com (Robert Derrick)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.couples,soc.singles
Subject: Re: lying to oneself
Date: 10 Apr 92 18:27:39 GMT
Distribution: world,soc

Meloney says:
: Well, bully for you.  The disagreement wasn't with whether *you* did this

  [i.e. true self-deception]

: 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.

Well, Meloney, I get the impression that you perceive me to be quite
young and perhaps overly optimistic.  Whether you mean it or not, I
take it as a compliment, and offer a hearty thank you.

As for gory details, I'd like to know of one, True, instance, gory or
no.  As to whether it makes no difference to you, I think that you would
not have spent so much time responding, if the subject was not just
a little important to you.  Why do you, personally, feel so strongly
about it?

I'll tell you why I feel strongly about it.  If a person can be said to
be truly lying to themselves, then they thru some twisted set of
rationalizations can absolve themselves of responsibility for their
actions.  That is precisely why we try to lie to ourselves.  If you
say that an alcoholic truly believes their self-deceptions, then the
alcoholic can also pretend that they are not responsible, thus 
perpetuating the so-called lie.  It is like some big social secret
that allows brigands to justify their debaucheries of other peoples
lives.  I think it is time that you stopped letting them get away with
it.

rob derrick
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: aatresa@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (Teresa Kline)
Subject: Re: Some things never die!
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Yeah, *right* !
Date:  7 Apr 1992 08:11 EST  

In article <1992Apr4.035110.13555@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>, s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. Muirden [GA]) writes...
> 
>*laughs and falls off chair*

I am glad I provided amusement...it is my goal in life.  :)

> 
>I love it...
> 
>is this going to be a net.saga for all the alt.romance peoples?
> 
>I hope so... I wanna hear more...
> 
>So Ed.. the ball is in your court!!
> 
>(hurry before I ask Teresa out!) *laughs*
> 

Why, thank you, Richard!  That's so sweet!  
Maybe you should think about that, Ed! 

-- Teresa

		Life -- just for the FUN of it!!!!
From: grx0521@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: On the bridge...
Date: 17 Apr 92 12:51:41 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services



	There you were
	Alone on the bridge
	You liked to be alone
	You said
	So did I
	I said
	Yet we stood
	On the bridge
	Talking till the morning.. 


Sameer
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles
From: kerryg@stat.rice.edu (Kerry Go)
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Organization: Dept. of Statistics, Rice University
Distribution: world,soc
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 21:02:59 GMT

In article <11350@ecs.soton.ac.uk> lm89@ecs.soton.ac.uk (McIlhoney L) writes:
>
>I have come to the conclusion that it never pays to try to woo someone
>away from someone else.  My story (in VERY brief):
>
>Last year one of my closest friends was in a relationship which was
>unhealthy in certain ways (I still believe this).  The problem was
>made worse when I fell in love with her (head over heels).
>
>My morality on this is that one should never steal, especially if
>it's going to hurt someone, so I decided I would not try to woo her
>away, however much suffering that would cause me in (a) my own jealousy
>and (b) watching her getting damaged.
>
>But, to use a rather cliched excuse, my hormones got the better of
>me and I tried anyway.  There were minor successes and failures but
>in the end ...
>
>Result, a year later:  we hate each other.

But you can hate each other regardless of whether she had a boyfriend or
not at the beginning of your relationship.

I see nothing wrong in telling/showing her you are available and interested.
On the other hand, I'm not into "stealing" or convincing her that she should
date me instead of the person she is dating now.

!@#$%^&*()_++|!@#$%^&*()_++|!@#$%^&*()_++|!@#$%^&*()_++|!@#$%^&*()_++|!@#$%^&*(

The person I want to live my life with is the person to whom I can give the
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: grs01153@runt.appstate.edu
Subject: Re: a question
Organization: Appalachian State University
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 17:44:09 GMT

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         `'
`'GRS01153@appstate.edu                             |                         `'
`'Appalachian State University                      |   a difficult task!     `'
`'Boone, NC                                         |                         `'
`'Doo woppa good times                              |                   -me!  `'
`'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`'
`'                                                                            `'
`'                        Is that legal in this state?                        `' 
`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
From: csuat@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Pete "Ganders" Favelle)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: a question
Date: 6 Apr 92 23:08:59 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, Warwick University, UK
Originator: csuat@clover


on 6 Apr 92 14:31:12 GMT,
grs01153@stat.appstate.edu said:

> What exactlty constitutes 'cheatin' on someone?

  "Doing something that you _know_  that  someone  wont want you to do without
letting  them  find  out" is  about the  best  answer  I can think of  in  one
sentence.

  It must vary a lot from person to  person - to me, I would automatically say
that seeing anybody when I'm dating  someone else  would  be `cheating' on the
one I was dating and not letting know.  I guess if neither of the two people I
was dating knew, I'd be cheating on both of them.

  The real trouble comes when you have to ask yourself where you draw the line
between simply being great friends with somebody and `seeing' that person in a
more romantic/involved way. It's easy to know when you're cheating on somebody
from  _your_  point  of view, if  your honest with yourself. The hard  part is
knowing what _they_ think of as you cheating on them, and the only way to find
that out is to communicate.

  Well, _I_ know what I mean, even if you guys don't :-)

  Hugs,

  Ganders

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

-- 
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<
#	     cstxqcv@dcs.warwick.ac.uk / csuat@csv.warwick.ac.uk	     #
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<
From: karleen sue davis <ksdavis@silver.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: Ed and Teresa (Carp ????)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 20:23:39 -0500

In article <1992Apr16.220411.7263@ultra.com> stcroix@ultra.com (Bill St. Croix) writes:

>Make that 6 for and 3 (THREE) against.  It is more appropriate to the, 
>"Romantic banter" in ARC.  Alt.romance is *supposed* to be a question and
>answer forum of sorts.  ARC is a CHATter place...as its name implies.

Since when does ANY alt.* group have a "supposed to"?  If you want THAT,
make it rec.romance or some other crazy thing, and have it moderated.

And as far as I can tell, they're not doing the "romance chat thing" here.
They're being silly, just like those of us who are reveling in 60s/70s/80s
memories.  (And the rest of the people here are helping--throwing in OTHER
silly things along the way.)  I had the impression that it was some kind of
a parody on relationships/stereotypes/why-it's-hard-to-get-a-date or some
such thing. 

And besides, you're outvoted.  7 for and 3 against.

Karleen

(And don't try to trick me into posting on alt.romance.chat by directing
followups there, I donwanna and you can't make me.)  :b


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: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 21:39:34 GMT

afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes:

>In article <kun9q4INN7kp@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>, erc@pogo.Corp.Sun.COM (Ed Carp) writes...
>>In article <1992Apr14.024027.10332@usho93.hou281.chevron.com> hrtcu@usho52.hou281.chevron.com (R.T.Cutler) writes:
>> 
>>>For GOD's sake, consumate this.  DO IT!!!!  And then maybe all of
>>>us can get some sleep.
>> 
>>Why?  That'd take all the fun out of it! :)

>Ed's right ... 30-45 seconds of passion and it's all over. :-)

>-- Stephen 

Well, it depends....if they do it in person, it could be 30-45 seconds.  
Otherwise, I think it takes a little bit longer to type ;)  But that's 
one thing that belongs in email!!! ;) ;) ;)
				-Wildfire-


 O______________________________________________________________________
 O              \\                                                       \
 O  And the seeds of love were sown                                       \
 O  And nurtured with desire            \\               -Wildfire-        |
 O  And when they started to grow        \\       lmh44500@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu|
 O  They grew like WILDFIRE!              \\         hoff@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu |
 O                             \\                                \\        |
 O  *Practice safe .sig!*        \\   .signature virus protected   \\     /
 O_______________________________________________________________________/
 O


Xref: sparky alt.romance:6746 soc.singles:10636 soc.couples:1945
From: afdenis@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Ed and Teresa (Carp ????)
Keywords: Let's mind our own business
Date: 15 Apr 92 17:08:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: lims02.15APR199212081014
Organization: Ancient Souls Inc.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr14.024027.10332@usho93.hou281.chevron.com>, hrtcu@usho52.hou281.chevron.com (R.T.Cutler) writes...
>For GOD's sake, consumate this.  
                 ^^^^^^^^^
Why would they want to turn it into a soup ? :-)

>DO IT!!!!  And then maybe all of us can get some sleep.

Sleep ? What's that ? 

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.


-- 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: 01ksdavis@bsu-ucs.uucp
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Romantic song list on another newsgroup
Date: 17 Apr 92 04:44:01 GMT


	Just a brief note that the newsgroup soc.singles is currently
discussing romantic songs.
	Don't know why it started there instead of here.  Doesn't really
matter, though.  just do yourselves a favor and look into it.
	The newsgroup would also appreciate your thoughts on romantic songs,
although most of them are modern, adult-contemporary, I have seen listings for
French songs.
	Besides, you could read what the other newsgroup came up with.

	You don't have to check it out, but I am sure that the newsgroup would
appreciate your contributions.

			Kyle
	"So you think you could love me and leave me to die?"

	QUEEN, "Bohemian Rhapsody"  
	Freddy Marcury shouldn't be forgotten.
From: erc@pogo.Corp.Sun.COM (Ed Carp)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: a question
Date: 8 Apr 92 20:34:30 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogo.corp.sun.com

In article <1992Apr8.130135.1@runt.appstate.edu> grs01153@runt.appstate.edu writes:

>Is it just me, or are Stephen's little asteriks before and after emphasized
>words incredibly annoying? It is almost like he is insulting our intelligence,

It's just you, Shannon.  Trust me...:)

>So I will ask the question we are all thinking, Stephen, why are you so anal?

Because he has to listen to assholes like you blather...

Just a joke, yeah...it's pretty juvenile to vent at someone and try and escape the consequences
by claiming "it was just a joke".
--
Ed Carp                                      415/336-0797 (work)

++ UNIX  SysAdmin, Systems  Programming  Services,  Utilities ++
++ and Programmer Productivity Tools                          ++
From: choy@skorpio.Usask.CA
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: SANCTITY of relations
Date: 15 Apr 92 01:27:29 GMT
Reply-To: choy@skorpio.Usask.CA
Organization: University of Saskatchewan


There is no sanctity to any relation. You still have to be careful, but
I can't enumerate everything you should watch out for.


Henry Choy
choy@skorpio.usask.ca
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: pashdown@javelin.sim.es.com (Pete Ashdown)
Subject: Sanctity Twist
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 21:13:08 GMT


Ok, so everyone seems to be pretty indignant at the thought of one person
interfearing with an existing releationship.  However, they seem to think that
the situation is completely black and white.  No grey areas.  Try this one on
for size.

A girl introduces herself to you and you think the introduction goes bad.  So
you don't bother to go out with her.  Then you meet again a few months later
and have a good chat, so you reverse your decision.  You go out, have a great
time, and are told that it was a great "date" when you drop the girl off at
her door.  Things progress over time and you find yourself falling deeper than
ever before.  You are both amazed.  Then one weekend she needs to take a trip
to see "someone".  You eventually come to find out that she has been making
weekly trips to see a boyfriend who she met in the interval between your first
introduction and your first date.  He lives a distance away.  You find
yourself torn between honor and love.  You choose love and things continue in
the same fashion.  Wonderfully romantic evenings, fantastically interesting
days.  But still the weekly visits take place.  She tells you how much she is
stressed by the situation and you decide to neither run away nor make demands.

So, I ask the Cyranos and Elizabeths "out there".  Is this an easy decision?
Can you just walk away from it and not feel you aren't making the biggest
mistake of your life?  Can you not feel that it isn't your responsibility to
press for a decision, but since the girl in question got herself into the
situation, she's got to get herself out?  It is obvious that someone will get
hurt sometime.  But what else is there to do but wait and see?

And yes, this isn't fiction.
-- 
 "Yeah, me and Saddam, we just signed a mutual reelection pact"  - Foetus Bush

DISCLAIMER: My writings have NOTHING to do with my employer.  Keep it that way.
Pete Ashdown  pashdown@javelin.sim.es.com  ...uunet!javelin.sim.es.com!pashdown