HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: liz@prc.unisys.com (Liz Loquacious)
Subject: Re: Can we can the suck-up bit?
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: Paramax Systems
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 21:10:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.202700.15221@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep1.193125.4264@gvl.unisys.com> liz@prc.unisys.com (Liz Loquacious) writes:
|> >
|> >And I even get to see the sweat bead up on his bare tanned chest as I
|> >watch him from my bedroom window, going back and forth, not missing a single 
|> >blade....I forgot all about James....
|>  
|>  I thought you were talking about me for a minute there.

Have a heart.  Don't go telling me things like that.  Don't say that would
describe you.  You know I'm not completely over you yet and you insinuate that
you personify my gardner fantasy.  It's just not fair!

                                     v
|> >Liz Loquacious - actually Mr. Crabbats (to protect the innocent) is doing
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hmmm, I don't get it.  Well, sometimes I'm a little slow on the uptake but
it just doesn't ring a bell.  Oh well, I guess we just couldn't communicate.

Liz Loquacious
From: swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Where the best posts come from
Date: 1 Sep 92 02:20:32 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <-xhn_lp.barry@netcom.com> barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:
>Sheba's the best poster in the newsgroup (though she doesn't post
>enough).
>
>Hey, aahz, what's my suckup score on this one?

There's the germ of a good suckup in there, but you really didn't
follow through.  And shouting to get your score when you haven't
completed your routine will cost you points, too.  ;-)

Side-note:  Sheba said she'll be at the Con in Niagara Falls this
October.  Anybody else coming?

-- 
Steve Swann                 |    Speak to me in many voices; make
swann@acsu.buffalo.edu      |      them all sound like one...  -BOC
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: DEFORMITIES AND PERVE
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 20:18:36 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <71601@apple.Apple.COM> stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones) writes:

>Assuming that one overgeneralized sociobiological theory deserves another:
>I've read that men's sexual orientations/preferences are in general more
>rigid than women's. What do you guys say? Do you have a single "type
>preference" that has existed unchanged since your first sexual experience?

I do have a preferred body shape that generally turns my eye that
goes that far back, but it has lots of company with all the other
shapes I've come to love over time.  My tastes are a lot more
fluid and inclusive than I ever thought they'd be during puberty,
that's for sure.  I think I find myself more rigid in the type of
personality I find attractive over time, though.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
The sun is gonna shine again / We're gonna make it 'round that bend
I'll walk another mile with you, 'cause you're my friend
The sun is gonna shine again.			- Graham Parker
From: cfg@cray.com (Cindy Glass)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Las Vegas
Date: 24 Aug 92 00:42:41 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.

In article <1992Aug23.214603.13165@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Hunk) writes:
>In article <1992Aug23.135606.16985@walter.cray.com> cfg@cray.com (Cindy Glass) writes:
>>Yep, I received one of 'those, "what seems to be a form letter" letters'.
>
>OOoo, I bet that guy is embarassed now!   He wasn't actually counting on you
>all COLLABORATING.  A woman at every subnode.  Looks like it didn't work.  The
>jig is up.  He's been caught with his pants down.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>
>P.S. You could break away from Cray, start your own company featuring a 65,536
>     multiprocessor PC with a GUI shell -- Glass Windows.



For the amount of traffic in soc.singles, it will probably be awhile
before he knows that the 'women in every subnode' are aware of the
'form letter'.

:-) It would be nice for the emailings to be 'original'...or at
*least* 'different'.  I don't know if his 'jig' is up or not....
he forgot to mention if his pants were down, so - I missed it...
DARN!

As for the PS - now, why on earth would I want to leave Cray to 
build yet *ANOTHER* PC that someone has already thought of....when
I leave, it will be to buy a group of cabins in the woods - that 
tourists flock to in the summer time and stay away from in the 
winters - so I can have my snow falls to myself!!
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: carl@sscl.uwo.ca (Carl Kaufmann)
Subject: Re: Boston Baby Boink!
Organization: Soc.Sci.Comp.Lab., U.West.Ont.
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 04:01:29 GMT

In article <3770@cvbnetPrime.COM>, bmeyer@feds12.prime.com (Robert A Meyer x2557 14-13) writes:

>     The Boston Baby Boink  
>     the weekend of Sept 12-13 1992
>     In Boston ... Massachussetts!

AAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!

I'll be in the area the weekend *before* this. :-(
To visit someone I met on the Net. :-)

Any chance of arranging a special sneak preview?
Please, please, pretty please.

CatGuy
*****************************************************************************
* See how the heart reaches *  Carl Kaufmann   * No one has to do anything, *
* out instinctively, for no * Soc.Sci.Comp.Lab * except bear consequences.  *
* reason but to touch.      *    U.West.Ont    *                            *
*       -Kate Bush          * carl@sscl.uwo.ca *       -Me                  *
*****************************************************************************

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 06:08:16 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <ewillims.714998989@unix1.tcd.ie> ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:

>	Well, why don't you show him how it's done, Rob?  How will 
>we know if you're any good at it unless you prove it!:>

Oh, but I have, me love, you just weren't paying attention.  I'll
do it again soon, though, so you can have another shot at the
Experience :-)

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
Across the evening sky, all the birds are leaving
But how can they know it's time for them to go?		- Sandy Denny
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 19:36:47 GMT

In article <kiran.714483423@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:

>Serious chocolate lovers do not mix their chocolate and their cheescake. 

Another good reason not to take things in life, even chocolate, too
seriously. 

>How many relationships have you gotten by being a Domestic God?  

I certainly haven't gotten any that way--usually I don't even start 
hearing "Oh, god!" all that often until the relationship has already
started.  But, on the other hand, being able to turn out a decent
alfredo sauce can make it a lot easier to come up with a good reason
why they should have dinner at your place. 

>(People often say, when they find out that I cook and sew, that I'd
>"make a good wife for someone."  But oddly, they never introduce me to
>this "someone.")

Oh, that's 'cause he's doing 10 years in maximum security for armed
robbery; anyway, his name is Bruno and he'll probably get out in a
couple of months so I'm sure they'll introduce him to you then (or at
least give him directions to your house).

Trygve
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Lurkers...
Date: 28 Aug 92 00:57:46 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Aug26.221746.4027@cs.ucla.edu> gds@cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:
|I found out that in order to get mail, you
|have to send mail (or post), to make your presence known to others
|with whom you'd like to correspond.

Good point.  When I used to read alt.personals just about every day someone
would post "why aren't there any women here" and then post "I'm a SWM looking
for a SWF.  Please send email".  Making your presence know isn't quite enough.
You have to make your presence known such that you sound interesting enough
that someone you'd like to correspond with would take the initiative to
respond.  It's not easy to coerce someone else to make the first move but
it can be done.    

>However, if you really want to increase your volume of email, have
>yourself added to big-internet@munnari.oz.au, or
>sun-managers@ra.mcs.anl.gov.  I hear those mailing lists sometimes
>clear 200 messages a day.
 
I hear forum@ea.tme.edu is doing pretty well also.

-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Oh, no! Statistics! Run!! :-)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:05:50 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <14304@auspex-gw.auspex.com>  johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
> |] margoli@watson.ibm.com writes:
> |] >No, women like men with Snap-On tools.  :-)
>
> I would have figured the Snap-off quality was pretty desirable as well.

Bingo - some women like to make sure the tool's safely stored at home
when their man's not.  :-)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Lurkers...
Date: 26 Aug 92 22:15:37 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Aug26.201719.2129@CERIS.Purdue.EDU> dheisler@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Dave Heisler) writes:
|From article <1992Aug26.192500.21837@cs.hw.ac.uk>, by neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Postlethwaite):
|> 
|> Though one things that put off some lurkers I guess, many of the regulars
|> or soc.singles 'old timers' (for want of a better word) seem to have their
|> cliques and are always having their little digs back and forth and I guess
|> people feel a little left out.
|> 
|  
|      i'll agree this is one reason. and I'll give you
|      another,
|
|      you email someone who posts and they never reply.
|      (yes, assuming it it got there) 
 
Depending on the content sometimes I won't respond to unsolicited email.  It's
my perogative.

|      CLIQUE, BANG!, GOTHCHA

All of us were one time soc.singles.neophytes.  We all subcribed to 
soc.singles at one point.  Some people decided to lurk and listen while
others decided, what the hell, and jumped into the fray.  That's what I
did and was promptly called an ASS by Oleg.  Undaunted, however I continued
to post, and interacted with "the clique" as if I was part of the group.
Sure, there are a lot of "in jokes" but after time you'll get to know the
personalities and people will get to know yours.

So many times soc.singles has been likened to a cocktail party.  Using this
analogy, if you are at a cocktail party and you don't know anyone you have
to choices.  You can either stand by the punch bowl and eat potato chips
and listen or you can attempt to interact with those already in conversation.
Whether on the net or at a cocktail party you need to listen before offering
your opinion.  Whether on the net or a cocktail party if you're obnoxious
or a bore you're going to be treated accordingly.  If you've got something
to say, or in some way entertaining people are going to listen to you.

-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: Can we can the suck-up bit?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 20:27:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.193125.4264@gvl.unisys.com> liz@prc.unisys.com (Liz Loquacious) writes:
>In article dbj@cs.washington.edu (Dave Johnson) writes:
>|> 
>|> Aha!  No wonder the excrutiatingly sensitive James got LJBF'd!
>|> Liz found a lawn-mowing SLUT!
>
>And I even get to see the sweat bead up on his bare tanned chest as I
>watch him from my bedroom window, going back and forth, not missing a single 
>blade....I forgot all about James....
 
 I thought you were talking about me for a minute there.
 
>
                                  v
>Liz Loquacious - actually Mr. Crabbats (to protect the innocent) is doing
>                 this in his retirement; he's got kids my age.  I like
>                 older men but....

 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
From: lana@magenta.corp.sgi.com (Lana Mountford)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Date: 25 Aug 92 21:27:38 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <1992Aug25.154006.23144@walter.bellcore.com>, walter (Walter Lego) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug25.151319.13394@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
|> >In article <Q4D6TST@netmbx.netmbx.de> rickk@netmbx.netmbx.de (Rick Kuhlbars) writes:
|> >>Seems that every woman you meet opens up along the lines of "mold me the way
|> >>you like."
|> >
|> >Maybe a good deal of women YOU meet get that way - but considering that the
|> >only common denominator in each encounter is YOU, could it somehow
|> >be possible that their reaction to you is because of some action on
|> >YOUR part?  Do you perchance give these women the impression that they
|> >just aren't perfect enough?  Just asking.
|> 
|> Given that a common denominator with Nancy and Lana who have similar views
|> of independence is their prior bad experience with a relationship, is it
|> possible that women that haven't gone through that same experience may still
|> wish to compromise more than they should?

I'd say that's pretty likely, Walter.  Most of the women I know who feel
the way I (and, it appears, Nancy) feel are the products of at least one
failed marriage (or seriously committed relationship), *and* have some
mileage on them. :-)


-- 

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|    /)                      | Lana Mountford    
|   / /  __    ___    __     | Silicon Graphics  
|__(_/__(__)\__/  )__(__)\__ | Mountain View, CA 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Las Vegas
Date: 25 Aug 92 19:27:08 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Aug25.150151.22000@walter.bellcore.com> nobody writes:
>In article <l9khviINNjfn@news.bbn.com> dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>>Hey Cindy, this is james on *good* behavior.  You haven't heard yet about
>>the cat-house, the used motorcycle lot, and the target shooting field.
>>And he did tell you that you were going to be babysitting his kids when
>>he's interviewing prospective employees, right?  (And james is very
>>thorough when it comes to interviews.)  And you wouldn't mind
>>putting up a couple of his biker friends when they come to visit, right?
>>They're almost no trouble at all, when they're not drunk.  Don't worry,
>>I'm sure you and james will get along just fine.
>>
>
>The nerve of this woman! First she deserts Brother james and then she bad 
>mouths him to other potential mates. She must still have feelings for james.
>
>						Walter

 
 Deep feelings if I'm not mistaken.
 Must be the Monk in me. Eh brother Walter?
 Monks do it more profoundly.
 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: fulton@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Ben Fulton)
Subject: Re: Oh, no! Statistics! Run!! :-)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 20:50:22 GMT

In <71349@apple.Apple.COM> stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones) writes:

>So which of you statistics-advocates have used statistics to get into what
>you considered a successful relationship? 

I believe approximately 47% of us have.

-- 
ben
fulton@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
"Get the hell out of my way!" - John Galt
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: liz@prc.unisys.com (Liz Loquacious)
Subject: Re: Can we can the suck-up bit?
Followup-To: soc.singles 
Organization: Paramax Systems
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 21:59:02 GMT

In article <14415@auspex-gw.auspex.com>, johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
|> 
|> Who do you think is running the camera?
|> 

How naughty John, peering in my room like that.  Yes perhaps you
should be spanked.

:-)

Liz Loquacious
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Subject: Re: attentive dependence Was: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:24:52 GMT

In <1992Aug29.123017.16863@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:

>In article <1992Aug28.205253.10432@ils.nwu.edu> dmm@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (donald) writes:

>>...when grad-school or friends diverted me for a while (as deadlines and
>>crises still tend to do) it wouldn't take long for her to uproot
>>things:
>>	"...great movie."
>>	"We should break up."

>ending #1.
>(pulls out gun) *blam*
>"Conseeder it eh divohce"

	I just hate to be picky but I think you'll find that he said
"Consider *this* a divorce"  (Arnie in Total Recall when he blows 
Sharon Stone away)   :-)
From: stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: attentive dependence Was: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Date: 30 Aug 92 22:38:49 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

dmm@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (donald) writes:

>First off she seemed to have her rather rigid script for how a
>relationship should proceed (Is this a common aspect of females?), 

I think not. But it is common for people who have little experience with
something such as a relationship, or for people who are feeling insecure,
to want things to be predictable.

>So why go into this here?  Well, other than group therapeutic gains
>from posting this, I'd like to hear how others feel about how the need
>for a sense of dependence and the need for attention relate.  You see, I
>am a rather attentive person toward others, but I've found that I need
>occational breaks from the same person 

People who feel secure about their relationship are likely to accept that 
their partner will sometimes want to do something else. It would also depend 
on how predictable the partner's behavior is. If I knew that you wanted, 
say, a couple days each week to yourself, that would not be a problem. If 
on the other hand, you tended to suddenly vanish for days because something 
else had caught your attention, I would probably find it difficult to 
deal with. Other people might not mind.

>So by being rather intensely
>attentive to somebody am I building in the other person a sense of my
>dependence on the other or possibly creating a dependence on me as a
>source of ample (but non-constant) attention?  Is there any hope for me?

Yes, you're setting up a situation in which the other person could get
"addicted" to your attention. However, this is not necessarily bad. There
is a certain heady addictive quality to good romantic relationships as well
as bad (IMO). The important thing is to make sure you find a partner who
is mature and secure enough so that they can retain their own identity while
enjoying your company and attention, and also that you find someone who
understands from experience that your style of sometimes focusing 
on something else doesn't mean that you have stopped being interested in them.

--
Stef                 Reality is that which, when you stop believing
stef@apple.com       in it, doesn't go away.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Subject: Re: The Chocolate Urgies (was: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long))
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 10:53:52 GMT

In <1992Aug26.172906.25719@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:

>In article <ewillims.714843551@unix1.tcd.ie> ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
>>	Weird as it sounds, chocolate sauce on meat is an original use
>>for chocolate. The Aztecs used to use it as a sauce and regarded it as
>> delicacy. That's what I call chocoholism.....my kind of people! (*GRIN*)

>There must be something hormonal about women and chocolate.

	There is a connection...read my earlier posting.
I did say it was chemical but some body out there, better qualified
than I to comment on this, may disagree with me and say it is 
hormonal!
 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: cfg@cray.com (Cindy Glass)
Subject: Re: Las Vegas
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 1 Sep 92 06:20:24 CDT


kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:

>>>kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>>>Can I open a little restaurant down the road from you?  
>>>Pizza, chocolate, and savory soups and stews all by ourselves by the
>>>fireplace in the wintertime when the tourons are gone...
>
>>cfg@cray.com (Cindy Glass) writes:
>>Maybe we could work something out!  The 'tourons' will need something
>>like this!  Maybe I would too!  :)
>
>Yes, you might.... those winter nights can get so long after a
>while... after a hard day's work making snowmen, it's nice to come
>home to a steaming tureen of hot soup, a cup of hot buttered rum or
>mulled wine, and a blazing fire... and good music and (of course)
>good company. What else d'ya need?  ;)

Maybe some marshmellows to toast - while watching the flames lick
the logs in the fire place - some music that some how manages to
bring it all together - some smiles and laughter!

:) :) :)

Cindy

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jbuck@forney.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: why lurk? was Re: Kiran Wagle
Date: 26 Aug 1992 00:16:21 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: forney.berkeley.edu


kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>>Survey time! Hey lurkers, why do you lurk? 

In article <1992Aug25.202733.12050@imagen.com> randy@elk.imagen.com (randy
scofield) writes:
>If I offend someone, I will have to spend a bunch of time in a flame war.

If you believe this, please keep lurking.  You don't have to spend time in
a flame war ... you could just apologize, ignore the flames, take it to
e-mail, or whatever.


--
Joe Buck	jbuck@ohm.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: soc.singles