HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: beh@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Bruce Howells)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: re:SO met through the computer
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:14:31 GMT
Distribution: alt
Organization: Internet access via the Free Software Foundation


Hm... I dated several men I met through the computer, first those who I'd
met via a local (University of Michigan) "bulletin board" called
Meet:Students, and then through (unfortunately) IRC.  

Even though I said "unfortunately" above, the truth is, I married my
husband (of course!) Bruce, whom I met through IRC.   We've been married
since December, and while things are not always perfect, they're perfect
for US.

Word of advice:  I was really ready to leave the place where I'd been
living.  I had just finished a degree at the UMich, and was, well, ready to
head on out... however, Bruce wasn't.  Consequently, we are here, in
Boston, a place where I never thought I'd be, and where (sometimes) I
really wish I wasn't now. I also had to give up a cushy job to come to him,
and then we had a hard settling in period, wherein we had to drop all the
pretenses of what we thought the other person was, and learn to accept what
the other person REALLY was.  We both were ready for a relationship,
however, and perhaps one of us more ready than the other, because there
were a few pretty awful moments.

Now?  Well, I'm afraid to say that I think we would have fallen in love if
we'd met through the computer or via the grocery store, but the truth is, I
don't think we ever would have met if it hadn't been for the computer.  

I do wish one thing, however... I wish that we had had a chance to live in
the same city as we fell in love, 'cause that would have made things a
trifle more easy, at least from my point of view.  I mean... I would have
KNOWN him better. 

--Nancy Howells (nee Leinonen)
beh@gnu.ai.mit.edu (through the good graces of my husband)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: weaver@jetsun.weitek.COM (Michael Gordon Weaver)
Subject: Re: Best Friend in a RP ???
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 16:20:21 GMT

In article <88963@netnews.upenn.edu> rpatel@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Rachana D Patel) writes:
>
>Hi guys. I have a philosphical question that has been on my mind 
>lately. Is it alright/healthy to consider your RP to be your best friend
>too? 
>
>If any of you feel that your RP should not be your best friend then what
>distance should your RP stay that is different from your best friend?
>
>Most of the people I have asked have said that your RP should be your best 
>freind. However, I have had some comments from some guys that it shouldn't
>be?
>
I think it is great if you think your RP is your best friend. I read a 
study that where most married men said their best friend was their wife,
while most married women said their best friend was another woman. I
don't think this means the women don't like their husbands, but rather
that they have more friends than the men. I think it is a bad thing
if your RP is your only friend, but I guess that is not what you
are talking about.

I think being friends makes for a more satisfying and stable relationship.
Some people do not like being friends with their RP. I am not one of them,
so I can really say why, but I can guess. One reason is to avoid putting
all your eggs in one basket, that is if you think your RP is likely to
go away at any moment, you don't want to depend on them too much. Another
reason is that you may not want to be too candid with your RP. Some people
feel very vulnerable if they let people know where they are coming from.
A third reason is that some people see their relationship with their RP
as two rigid roles, and would rather play these roles better, and avoid
the complication of dealing with two real people.


Michael.
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: petitc@vccnw07.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Food For Thought
Reply-To: petitc@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 12:04:45 GMT

  Well, I just saw an article that made me want to post this little thing,
something I call...

	         	MURPHY'S LAWS ON LOVE

1. All the good ones are taken.
2.  If the person isn't taken, there's a reason (corr. to #1)
3.  The nicer someone is, the farther away (s)he is from you.
4.  Brains x Beauty x Availability = Constant
5.  The amount of love someone feels for you is inversely proportional to how
much you love them.
6.  Money can't buy love, but it sure gets you a great bargaining position.
7.  The best things in the world are free---and worth every penny of it.

  Note:  Take this _very_ tongue-in-cheek.  Anybody think that their lovelives
tend to follow one or more of these rules? :&)

-- 
Trust:  A very precious social commodity, due both to high value and terrible
scarcity.
MATWDTM:  Mothers Against Teenagers Who Drink Too Much (failed name for MADD)




Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: eigenstr@cs.rose-hulman.edu (Todd R. Eigenschink)
Subject: Re: SO met through the computer. Anyone else ?
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Distribution: alt
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:28:56 GMT

Count me in on this one.  I "met" mine in February via a "delurk" post
to A.R.C.  We never got to the 7 hour-a-day mark, but 2 or 3 hours was
no big deal (that hurts when you're taking 20 credit-hours and one of
them is a compilers class :).

Anyway, she flew up (I live in Wisconsin, she lives in Texas) for a
weekend in July (big risk, eh?)...things went great.  I agree with
what you said--had it not "worked out", it would have been a big
problem talking anymore, or at least the same.

And then--this is the good part--this past Saturday, I leaving the
mailroom from checking my mail, and somebody tells me that someone's
looking for me.  He jumps out the door that's right by us and points,
"And there she is."  Guess who?  She _drove_ 1,000 miles (I go to
school in Indiana) _WITHOUT_TELLING_ME_...  Of course, I was more or
less ecstatic to see her, and for most of the rest of the weekend, I
made sure that was very clear to her... ;) (Yeah, one thing does lead
to another, although there are points where both of us just say "no".)

--
Todd Eigenschink (eigenstr@CS.Rose-Hulman.Edu)
Psychopathic Peon System Administrator
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, Terre Haute, IN
"I've seen it work before..." -- Stephen Smalley
From: slayer@gl.pitt.edu (Deborah)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Romantic Songs Discussion list
Date: 8 Sep 92 01:20:51 GMT

In article <1992Sep07.164048.11037@spc.nl> stefan@spc.nl (Stefan Posthuma) writes:

Romantic songs?

How about...

Yes there are so many songs out there for romantic people..
My personal favorite is *Songbird* by Kenny G.

His music just gets to you and makes you tingle.. Anything from
Anita Baker is also wonderful..



-- 
May look a little young 
So what's wrong ?
You don't have to be old to be wise
From: eyc@cs.bham.ac.uk (Ed Carter)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Romantic Songs Discussion list
Date: 8 Sep 92 19:53:24 GMT
Organization: University of Birmingham

I just thought I'd de-lurk to wonder about this particular
thread for a moment.

From what else I've read here, it seems that a useful social
function could be served by starting a LJBF Songs Discussion
List for people to listen to when utterly miserable. Either
to cheer themselves up or, of course, to wallow in self pity.

After all, who needs music when you're in love?        :-)


(I only mentioned it 'cos I can only think of miserable songs
at the moment and I was feeling left out. sniffle.)
From: 01sybok@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: PAIN!
Date: 14 Sep 92 13:36:12 GMT
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

In article <BuFD94.FBJ@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>, mtompset@napier.uwaterloo.ca (Mark Tompsett) writes:
> In article <eagle.716184850@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu> eagle@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Daniel L'Hommedieu) writes:
>>jbell@mihi.une.edu.au (Master of Puppets) writes:
>>>well, life sux
>>>pain hurts
>>>and I wanna die
>>I hope you don't mean that last line.
> 
> Oh hope so too. Trust me, death sux too!
> 
>>It really is true, what they say: once you forget about someone, and
>>quit looking for someone else, someone will pop into your life.  I'm
>>living proof of that one.
> 
> Sorry, but one person doesn't constitue a proof for me. Frankly, I've
> given up on this stupid social game that everyone plays. I can't find one,
> and I seriously doubt I will. I have ceased looking, and frankly, I don't
> think it is worth it. After all, they are just going to dump you and go for
> some cuter, younger, "sexier" guy. Do I sound negative? Well, that's because
> I'm a negative person. Yes, I realize that may contribute as to why, but
> if someone isn't willing to take a chance on me, then why should I change?
> 

WHHOHOOOOOOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOH! I ENTHUSIASTICALLY second that statement!

Mike, who recently gave up.
From: drburne@eos.ncsu.edu (DALE ROBERT BURNETT)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Nice Guys?
Date: 12 Sep 92 15:45:59 GMT
Reply-To: drburne@eos.ncsu.edu (DALE ROBERT BURNETT)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Originator: drburne@c00031-118dan.eos.ncsu.edu



i am (i think) a nice guy and i dont have any of the problems that the nice
guys posting here have.  i seldom finish last and but i dont always win 
either.  to many nice guys are afraid of rejection and wont stick there neck
out and ask someone out.  
to many people take it personal when someone doesnt want to go out with
them.  some will, wome wont.  so what.  when some one wont go out with
you then ask somebody else.  if you are truly the good guy you say you are
then its there loss, right!?!

to many nice guys are also wishy-washy.  i have set morals that i live by
and i am not afraid to tell my dates this.  if they dont like it, then
oh well.  i find that if you stand up for what you think is right you will 
attract people to you.

remember,  you attract to you what you are not what you want.
maybe not enough people know what you stand for.


of course i might have some personasl quality the i dont know about that
everyone else can see which takes me out of the nice guy category.
which would explain why i dont have these problems.


dale --- might be a nice guy
From: 21329KAD@MSU (Kim Dyer)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Romantic songs
Date: 15 Sep 92 00:30:07 GMT
Organization: Michigan State University

>how about.....   Romantic songs for those in LDRs??
>a few that come to mind:
>"Weekend in New England"   Barry Manilow
>"Nights are Forever without you"  England Dan and John For Coley
>"Someday We'll Be Together"  Diana Ross and the Supremes
>"Missing You"  Michael Bolton

"Come Monday" Jimmy Buffett
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: bolsen@mcs213f.cs.umr.edu (Brian Olsen)
Subject: Re: Nice Guys (Solutions)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:10:22 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla

In article <1992Sep15.140247.13142@tamsun.tamu.edu> peram@cs.tamu.edu (Suresh B Peram) writes:
>
>There are as many women as there are men.  So, why
>do people complain that they don't get anybody.
>Because, the system has gone bad.  Dating should be
>just what it should be - just dating.  A girlfriend
>or a boyfriend is NOT a spouse.  If people took their
>time to date as many people as they want to find 
>their SO and don't enter into serious relationships
>(mini-marriages) until they find somebody that they
>are sure (then, go ahead and propose), everybody would
>get to date, dating many people at the same time would
>be acceptable (after all, nobody should be prevented
>from dating anybody they like till they commit, since
>marriage is no simple thing), and there would be more
>satisfaction because you have chosen your partner from
>among many.  People can still make bad choices (people
>are stupid; appearances are deceptive etc.) but there
>would not be as much of a nonsence, hurt feelings etc.
>as there are now.  I think everybody should date at least
>25 people before they decide on an SO. 
>
>Suresh

I wholeheartedly agree with the above statement.  I have a very strong
belief in "fate": that for every person there's a perfect mate.  These
ever-so-prevalent "mini-marriages", as Suresh called them, just serve
to blind those involved in the event that the right person does come
along.

Hmm....must have something to do with our high school culture or just a
general sense of insecurity among girls and guys both.

Brian


"Say wanton will you love me?"
"I love no long delaying"
"Whilst that you strive to prove me"
"I fear your love's decaying."

"Fear not, my love's decaying"
"Whilst that you strive to prove me"
"I love no long delaying"
"Come, wanton, then and love me."

--Stolen from one of my roommate's early Rennaissance compositions.
(TTB, me either B or T2)

Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: jholtgra@afit.af.mil (Jeremy C. Holtgrave)
Subject: Re: SO met through the computer. Anyone else ?
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:10:51 GMT

In article <grada.108.0@columbia.dsu.edu> grada@columbia.dsu.edu (Alison Grad) writes:
>I met my current boyfriend over the computer...  We talked for _HOURS_...  
>(I have the phone bill to prove it...)  Then in July he came out here.  (I 
>live in South Dakota and he is from Ohio.)  Well, needless to say, he now 
>goes to school here and we have been together for almost five months now.  
>Isn't life grand?
>
>Alison

I don't know, don't you think it's risky having him come to school in
South Dakota because his sweetheart goes there?  You've been together
for five months, great!, but what if things don't work out within the
next two?  That leaves him far away from home for no good reason.  I'm
not criticizing the relationship, it's just that I knew a girl in
college (University of Illinois) who transfered to Oregon State to be
with her SO.  It didn`t work out, she decided to return to Illinois, and
many of her credits didn't transfer.  A year wasted!

Romance is a wonderful thing, but it's important to keep you eyes open
too.

Jeremy
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Romance? Romance!
From: jhsegal@wiscon.weizmann.ac.il (Livy)
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 13:09:55 GMT
Organization: Weizmann Institute of Science, Computation Center

Gee,I have an idea! What about posting some romantic things to this newsgroup?
I know that on the last period ROMANCE isn't exactly what you may find here,
but,you know,make an effort...huh? whaddaya say about it?
Thanks,folks
Livy
From: bradl@informix.com (Brad Levy)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: LJBF Songs Discussion list
Date: 9 Sep 92 19:35:44 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <1992Sep8.205324@cs.bham.ac.uk> eyc@cs.bham.ac.uk (Ed Carter) writes:
>I just thought I'd de-lurk to wonder about this particular
>thread for a moment.
>
>From what else I've read here, it seems that a useful social
>function could be served by starting a LJBF Songs Discussion
>List for people to listen to when utterly miserable. Either
>to cheer themselves up or, of course, to wallow in self pity.

Okay - I'll make the first contribution.  A song of hope.  (And perhaps
a fitting title, too.)   It's the first cut on John McCutcheon's 
"Water From Another Time" CD/Cassette.  The title is The Great Storm Is Over. 

- brad levy (bradl@informix.com)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: jjd@world.std.com (Jake)
Subject: Re: SO met through the computer. Anyone else ?
Organization: Neurotic Greetings, Inc.
Distribution: alt
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:59:27 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.131245.3082@client21.comlab.ox.ac.uk> sharon@comlab.ox.ac.uk (Sharon Curtis) writes:
>In a previous article:
>>               Is there anyone else out there who met his/her SO through the
>>       computer ? It would be fun to hear similar cases.
>
>I met my SO that way.
>
	[Story Deleted]
>
>Long live romance!
>
I second that! :)
>
>Incidentally my fella is lovely, and I like doing romantic things for him,
>but I'm running out of ideas - what do you guys out there find really
>romantic for a girlfriend to do to/for you?
>

[*sound of soapbox being drug out*] Well, IMHO, I've found that if my
SO "gives of herself" I find that I'm much more touched.  For example,
about three weeks ago I sent her a card.  On the back of the card I
drew a little picture of a couple sitting on a park bench.  The moon
was in the sky and I drew in some stars.  She made a bigger deal out
of the drawing than she did of the card.  Yesterday I got a card from
her.  She had drawn a likeness of me on the back with "Florida or
Bust" (she's in FL, I'm in VA) sign.   And you know, I was more
touched by the picture than I was by the card (it *was* a nice card,
BTW)

Bottom Line:  personalizing something is romantic.  Anybody can
address a card and lick a stamp.  Make your own card.  Make it as
dirty or as corny or as sweet or as  *anything* as you want!  Whatever
you normally consider "romantic", try to personalize it a bit.  The
effort will be appreciated (if he's any kind of man at all)!

>Sharon


-- 

------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, just "Jake", or jjd@world.std.com.  Sure, it's a pseudonym.
   How many of us are "real" when we use our actual names, eh?
From: jaker@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (Jake Rose)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: SO met through the computer. Anyone else ?
Date: 14 Sep 92 19:23:52 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech Computer Science Dept, Blacksburg, VA

petitc@nuge104.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit) writes:

>In article <1992Sep14.161151.24855@athena.mit.edu>, zhu@athena.mit.edu (Erin Zhu) writes:
>|> Another hand here.  It started out as an email correspondence, turned
>|> into a phone and email "courtship" (the phone part was limited because
>|> we were 3000 miles apart), decided that we were in love about a month
>|> and half into the conversation (without meeting or even seeing
>|> pictures of each other, were we impulsive or _what_?), met in real
>|> life a month later when he flew over to see me, I flew to see him two
>|> weeks later (I had to finish finals), and moved in promptly.  It's
>|> been a year and half since we started corresponding, and we're still
>|> very much together.
>|> 

>  One question:  How in the world can you fall in Love when you haven't even
>seen the person yet?

I did.  It's not hard.  We talked on the phone, via echat, MUSHes, etcetera,
for two months before she mailed her photo to me... ...it's not hard if you
care about who the person is instead of what they are - hey, I thought you
were a "nice guy"! :)

>Trust:  A very precious social commodity, due both to high value and terrible
>scarcity.
>MATWDTM:  Mothers Against Teenagers Who Drink Too Much (failed name for MADD)

Wulf                    | "Martha, it's another one of those CS majors asking
jaker@csugrad.cs.vt.edu |  if cow chips are pin-compatible with 68040s..."
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: naveena@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (Naveena Michael)
Subject: Romantic songs
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 20:09:40 GMT

While this dicussion on romantic songs is on, I need to add my favorite songs
as well. I have put them in order of my priorities.

1. Cant fight this feeling - Rio Speed Wagon
2. Even the nights are better - Air Supply (All their songs are good)
3. Youre the inspiration _ Peter Cetera (Chicago)
4. I will be right here waiting for you _ Richard Marx.
5. Glory of love _ Peter Cetera
	
	These are the ones which come to my mind right now.  There are a couple
more.  I'll add them later on I guess.
It sure is nice to know that there are romantic people out there in the big 
bad world.

Naveena Michael
naveena@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu


Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: gryphon@wpi.WPI.EDU (M-5)
Subject: Re: Food For Thought
Organization: RecursionCo.: We'll do it again and again and again and again a
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:57:29 GMT

laws deleted

How about...

ALL OF THEM?

Actually, no...just the fifth one (the one about love being inversely 
proportional)...

--G.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Natural Progressions to be Found in the English Language #247-11A:
          cat.......................................catapult
INTERNET: gryphon@world.std.com               BELLNET: (508)755-4675
SNAILNET: Benjamin D. Hutchins, 14 Dover St. #2B, Worcester, MA  01609
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: aatresa@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Teresa Kline)
Subject: Re: Who gets the longer stick, men or women? ;)
Summary: Bleah. :/
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Yeah, *right* !
Date: 15 Sep 1992 16:26 EST  

In article <15SEP199216233603@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov>, afdenis@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison) writes...
>... and your use of the `plural' makes me wonder why you tried more than 
>1 if the first one wasn't good ...
> 

If at first you don't succeed.....

>... and besides, I have data to the contrary. *I* am considered `good' and 
>I'm only 5' 10".

Good for nothin'!  :-)

> 
>... or wasn't that what you were talking about ? :-)
> 

Ummmmmmm...welllllll......

-- Teresa

		Life -- just for the FUN of it!!!!
From: jbell@mihi.une.edu.au (Master of Puppets)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: PAIN!
Date: 10 Sep 1992 20:56:45 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu
X-Unparseable-Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 11:55:54 GMT-10:00

well, life sux
pain hurts
and I wanna die
-- 
/------------------------jbell@mihi.une.edu.au--------------------------\
| so, understand  |-----Iron Maiden--"Wasted years"-----| | Justin Bell |
| the wasted time always searching for those wasted years |             |
| face up, make your stand |---Iron Maiden? EXCELLENT---| |  +61-67-72  |
| and realise you're living in those golden years         |     6247    |
\-------------90 Taylor St., Armidale, NSW, 2350, AUSTRALIA-------------/
From: 01ksdavis@bsu-ucs.uucp
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Definition:  Nice guys.
Date: 14 Sep 92 23:13:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.172655.18879@umr.edu>, bolsen@cs.umr.edu (Brian Olsen) writes:
> 
> I hope this hasn't already been discussed, but I'm wondering if a definition
> from a "nice guy" has been established.
> 
> I personally think of a nice guy as being one who desires to establish a
> relationship which involves unconditional companionship based on courtesy,
> honesty and a genuine concern for the other party's well being (a genuine
> romantic!).
> 
> Of course, I realize this little notion is very, very innocent and
> naive:  any guy out there has the potential of being a self serving
> bastard, me included.
> 
> Brian     
	Nice guy.  Let's see... something about "finishing last?"

		Kyle
From: jaker@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (Jake Rose)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: PLEASE! I need your help! LDR, RELIGION..
Date: 14 Sep 92 14:27:33 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Virginia Tech Computer Science Dept, Blacksburg, VA

Mixed-religion marriages are not typically something to jump into;
a lot depends on you and her.  If you are willing to give up your
religion and accept (if not adopt) hers, or she yours, that's one
possibility.  Raising children in mixed families is not the only
problem (after all, you'll want them raised whatever you are and
she'll want them raised Jewish, most likely - taking them to
services and things for both religions just gets confusing and
time-consuming for them, and especially the confusion they can do
without - typically children from mixed marriages end up adopting
neither religion and accept one or another agnostic, pagan, or
something-else-entirely religion.  That's a concern.  Then there's
also the concern of how you two would be practicing your own
religions, and how others would view you and whether that matters;
remember that there are a good many animosities against Jews in
particular from various hate groups and from various churches; be
sure that by marrying a Jew you will be a target for hate-crimes.

So, these are all the problems that you might face (or most of them
anyway)... ...of course, your relationship might be worth it!

Wulf                    | "Martha, it's another one of those CS majors asking
jaker@csugrad.cs.vt.edu |  if cow chips are pin-compatible with 68040s..."