HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: Kiran Wagle
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:27:02 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 <1992Aug24.035919.6460@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> oldman@coos.dartmouth.edu (Prakash Das) writes:

>Sarcasm seems to be lost on you.

Um, Prakash, sarcasm usually flat doesn't work at all in written form.
Most of us have found that out through long experience by actively
posting and being misunderstood enough times that we take special care
to make sure we're trying to express ourselves the way we want to.

>So by a process of reasoning by elimination, am I supposed to
>conclude that the purpose of this, and other perhaps, group(s)
>is to provide entertainment to the non-lurkers solely?

Mostly.  The participants set the charter, I feel.  If you want to
lurk, how can we know what you want to see discussed in here?  How
can us net.hot.shots entertain quiet masses who don't care to react?
Hell, at least cows would moo and fart every once in awhile :-)  You
have expressed good opinions here, but you seem to resent the fact
that we couldn't read your mind and change anyway.  That ain't how
it works.

>Anyway, I am making criticisms in good faith, and some of your
>postings are not bad. My purpose is simply to tell you to
>polish it up.

Truth in advertising time - I flipped when the first page of articles
came up composed entirely of Kiran Wagle postings.  Gods!  They all
expired before I read any of them, so I don't know if they were worth
their bandwidth or not, but I confess that I wonder if Kiran had to
post quite that many articles, at least in one shot.  A little more
moderation might indeed be in order from some of our superstars :-)

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
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: How'd You Get Here?? (Was:Lurkers)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 14:57:40 GMT

	Hmmm. I got my account in 1987 or so and lurked for a year or so.
My first postings were  in 1988, concerning mass writers' meetings for a
local uw group, and were pretty dull. Fortunately, stress warped my brain
and I started trying to liven things up: the posting about the double-booking
of  MC 5158  with FASS and the Tantric Yoga  appreciation club was the first
not entirely factual posting I made deliberately.

	Damned  if I recall what prompted me to post *here*, though.
Might have been the young  fellah complaining that when he followed 
the advice  of women in High School, the advice appeared flawed, which
made me wonder whether other adolescents are a useful source of tutoring.
I seem  to be a lurker again for some reason.

	Best quote from the police interviewing my aunt, who had just 
found my mother's dead body (Natural causes, really); asked while standing
next to the body:

	"Did you find anything in the house which upset you?"

							James Nicoll
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Mexican food in Boston?  Blecch!!!!
Date: 27 Aug 92 22:45:18 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <l9pr67INNfr9@news.bbn.com> dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
 
|However, I have been hearing more rumors about a Boston boink, so maybe
|people can come check out either the mexican food or the pickle collection.

Let's see if I got this straight.  If I go to the Boston boink I look for
pickles.  In Phoenix (or is it Tuscon) it's bananas.   Where is the
cucumber boink?

-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
From: wjb@moscom.UUCP (Bill de Beaubien)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Powerful forces of nature conspire
Date: 3 Sep 92 00:08:56 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford, NY
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

John Fereira (johnf@Auspex.COM) wrote:
: Dollie and Holmes, the anatomically correct snowpeople, were the results
: of a snow storm which resulted in 9 feet of new snow in three days.  

Of course that assumes one considers Dollie and Holmes as anatomically
correct...  certainly not typical of the species.  'sides, I'll bet you
had a hard time making his droop like that... or did you wait for the
thaw? :-)
-- 
"Bless me, Father; I ate a lizard."
"Was it an abstinence day, and was it artificially prepared?"
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bill de Beaubien / wjb@moscom.com
From: pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Date: 28 Aug 92 03:54:26 GMT
Organization: Trivializers R Us

In article <9208280020.AA04245@regal.cisco.com> mlb@CISCO.COM (Marcia Bednarcyk) writes:
>In article <1992Aug25.154006.23144@walter.bellcore.com>, walter (Walter Lego) writes:
>|> 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? 
>
>This is an interesting point, because there's nothing like walking through
>fire to help clarify your needs and wants. Some people seem to know
>instinctively what they want and what is a fair compromise, some seem to
>learn that from a bad experience, and some may never learn :-).

If you think about this from a classical conditioning perspective, it's
not really that surprising. Only with angels and suchlike does one
really expect one-trial learning of a complex behavior. And given the
reinforcement patterns most of us have to look back on, it's not
surprising that it takes a real serious nudge for people to learn
what they should and shouldn't be doing wrt their own needs. Like
they say, "... and then, when you have the mule's attention, you
explain clearly and calmly what it is you want it to do."

paul     who looks back and marvels
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Dawn of Suckups (Was: Re: Bananas)
Date: 31 Aug 92 15:41:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: uwm.1992Aug31.154146.23076
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee

In article <1992Aug29.125914.18314@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>
>The best way to do a suckup big time is to ask around, find out the person's
>real address or work address and then send them a bouquet or some other
>suprise.

In article <la4bopINNgh3@news.bbn.com> dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>Not unless the person knows you by at least e-mail first.  I'd get seriously
>weirded out to think that some unknown person had my home address.  

Would work address be less threatening, Ms. Hardin? :)
From: dheisler@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Dave Heisler)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: afternoon delight -sort of
Date: 1 Sep 92 18:20:39 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University


                         ***
                     **       **
                   **           **
                 **    0    0     **
                **       /         **
                **                 **
                 **   #       #   **
                   **   # # #   **
                      **      **      Just 'cause it's Tuesday.      
                         ****
From: swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Lurkers...
Date: 28 Aug 92 02:54:35 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <14344@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>In article <1992Aug26.214548.17263@odin.corp.sgi.com> lana@magenta.corp.sgi.com (Lana Mountford) writes:
>|with the traffic here can be a bit of a problem -- I mean, I *DO* work! :-)),
>
>So *that's* why you haven't responded to my email?

Quit grasping at staws, John, it's undignified.  ;-)

-- 
Steve Swann                 |    Speak to me in many voices; make
swann@acsu.buffalo.edu      |      them all sound like one...  -BOC
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Major suckup (was: Re: Where the best posts come from)
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:19:40 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <1992Sep1.001825.3594@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>
>Speaking of names, I'm curious.  Is Diamond your real name, or is it a just a
>reflection of your worth as a human being?

Er, no, it's just a userid I used to use a long time ago, which came from
a Boomtown Rats song called 'Diamond Smiles'.  When I got here to Duke and
they offered to let me choose my own userid, I just wrote this down, and since
I noticed this group already has a 'Beth' I was afraid that if I signed my
actual name I'd confuse people.  Actually, 'Diamond Smiles' is a pretty
depressing song, and I'm not nearly as depressed a person as I was back when
I first selected a userid... anybody got any better ideas?  Maybe I'll just
have them change my userid to my last name.  Boring, but simple.

				Diamond (or Beth)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rudoff@mdd.comm.mot.com (Doug Rudoff)
Subject: Cruel to be Kind (was Re: Cooling things off... Finale)
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 18:03:41 GMT

>for him to be alone with me, so I am not really worried about having
>a confrontation or a deep conversation.  My strategy will be to try
>to have as little contact as possible with him, and only bring up
>the fact that I feel uncomfortable around him if he starts asking
>me why I have become so distant.  Perhaps the fact that I have not
>answered his E-mail has helped him to realize that I do not want
>to have close contact with him.  I only want to be blunt if I have
>to be (due to the emotional fragilty I mentioned before).
>
>I tend to be a very direct person, but bluntness would be a big
>mistake in this situation, I think.  I will still be looking for
>any replies if anyone has one at this late date :-)  Thanks
>again!

There's something here that really bugs me. You want him to know that
you don't want anything to do with him. You decided that you'll do it
by not responding to his E-mail. In a few days or weeks he'll get the
picture. If you told him bluntly, he'd get the picture in about thirty
seconds. Why do you think a rejection that takes days is better than
one that's immediate? The end result is the same. If he's emotionally
fragile he'll be hurt either way, and more likely hurt even more than
if you don't tell him immediately. Why? Because he'll be agonizing for
days about why you won't talk to him.

The fact is people don't like hurting other people and avoiding
confrontation is a way to try to not deal with it. As the quote from
the song goes, "Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind."

Last year I had a women who I thought was a friend cool things off by
not talking to me. And I was miserable for weeks wondering what the
hell happened. I had this unrealistic expectation that she would be
honest with me. I wish she had had the guts and/or compassion to tell
me what happened. Even a "fuck off and die" would have been better
then her silence.

At least for me, rejection is no big deal. Not knowing what's
happening is much worse. I've talked to many friends who feel the same
way. How do you feel about it?

If you reversed the situation, with you the one interested and he the
one wanting to cool things off, how would you want him to end things?
If it's not what your doing now, maybe you should reconsider your
actions now.
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Doug Rudoff          Motorola, Seattle    INTERNET:rudoff@mdd.comm.mot.com
                                            USENET:uunet!mdisea!rudoff   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: motani@watson.ibm.com (Muiz Motani)
Subject: Re: Homesickness!
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:54:25 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.037 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: motani@vnet.ibm.com (Muiz Motani)
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In  <SCHOCK.92Aug28170011@fsd.cpsc.UCalgary.ca>  schock@cpsc.UCalgary.ca (schock) writes:
> So, where exactly is "home" for you two?  I'm here at my first home (Calgary) but
> I can't leave to go to my second home (SaltSpring). 
> 

"Home" for me is Vancouver, or to be more precise, Richmond. I spent a lot of 
time in the Gulf Islands going campin', hikin', bikin' and relaxin', though. I 
sure do miss it.

On a related note.....Did anybody see the Emmy awards last night? Richard Dykart
(sp?) of Leland McKenzie fame from L.A. Law made reference to the Sunshine Coast
when he said that getting the award was "Skookum". I didn't know he was from 
B.C. Can anybody else explain or corroborate that?


________________________________________________________________________________
Muiz Motani                     
IBM Canada Lab                  motani@vnet.ibm.com
Distributed System Products
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Subject: Re: Powerful forces of nature conspire
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 11:03:05 GMT

In article <ewillims.714912462@unix1.tcd.ie> ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
>In <dtbn29a@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Aug25.210604.11207@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>>>   Oh Lord.  Thank you for conspiring to make this, the first day of in-person
>>>registration at a University with one of the largest coed student populations in
>>>the nation, a sweltering hot day.  I will never again ask for anything again.
>>>My life is truly fulfilled. :)
>
>>What, did you get laid?
>>If so, we want details, sir!
>
>		Yes!  Dooooo tell!:>

If I were single and had plenty of free time, I probably would have been
laid. :)  However, I'm involved with a special woman at this time.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle)
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 03:16:49 GMT

diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Me) writes:
>>>diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:

>>Did this get you any relationships?
>Actually, it does work a surprising amount of the time.  Many people that
>don't *act* interested turn out to be, and are merely too shy or too worried

This is somewhat different from what i originally thought you were
saying: that you pursue ppl who are actually uninterested.

>>becuse for some unfathomed reason, you  do not _want_ a relationship.
>>(Of course, if pursuing ppl who are not interested gets you satisfying
>>relationships, then clearly my theory is out to lunch.) 
>The problem is, it does get me relationships, but usually not ones that

Well then my theory is out to lunch.  I hope it's having pizza at Sally's.
Fresh tomato, basil, mozarella, garlic--yum.  Worth the drive to New
Haven.  The neon parking garage & the Dodo are cool too.

>people who are totally self-sufficient don't need partners by definition).  

Now _this_ claim has been thoroughly lambasted here: many ppl say that
you must be utterly and absolutely an island before you are even ready
to contemplate romantic relationships.  (I on the other hand think you
should be a Wombat.)

>I might be willing to believe that I secretly don't want a relationship, but
>I'm not sure I'd be as convinced that I secretly want only unsatisfying

Why is one more believable than the other?  I can think of far more
reasons to suspect the latter--but as your approach has been getting
you relationships of some sort, it would be mere speculation.

>>>(And any rehabilitation suggestions for a sufferer)? 
>>Start paying attention to ppl who are interested in you?
>It's possible to change my actions, but it's hard to change my perceptions.

Huh?  In other words, you don't know how to tell when someone is interested?

Well that is a subject for another thread...

-- 
"Pet Wombats occasionally show some sign of affection, if you need it
 that much.  They bite you from time to time in a listless manner and
 for no reason that is apparent to a non-Wombat."
 .................Will Cuppy, _How to Attract The Wombat_ (of course)
-- 
Kiran Wagle     <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>     (812) 335-0420
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Subject: Re: Las Vegas
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 18:14:33 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <1992Aug21.213353.1705@news.acns.nwu.edu> drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max) writes:
>
>Anyone else getting what appears to be an email form letter come-on that
>starts something like, I read one of your posts and thought it was
>interesting....  ?  Just curious.

Gee, that's funny -- I'm *not* getting any.  Must not be posting enough
or something.....
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

"I 'got a life'.  Now what?"
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: userDHAL@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (David Halliwell)
Subject: Re: Ring for sale (The ballad of a Guy & Girl)
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 23:28:25 GMT

tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:

>Every once in a while, I scan through the classified ads looking for 
>interesting things that I don't own and I occasionally check the "for
>sale or trade" section.  Now, most ads in this particular section tend
>to read like "1971 pickup truck; will trade for guns" or "pool table,
>perfect condition; will trade for guns" with firearms serving as the
>principal units of currency.  My favorite, though, was "Engagement 
>ring, appraised at <somethingorother>; will trade for guns."

    Of course, if the person had possessed a shotgun at the wedding, then
there wouldn't be any need to trade the ring!


Dave Halliwell
Department of Geography
University of Alberta
Edmonton, Alberta
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: enigma@halcyon.com (Matt Luders)
Subject: Where the best posts come from
Keywords: intelligence insight
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 08:05:47 GMT

Keith Garrard writes:

> A little note though, the most interesting posts come from "Angelwing".

In my humble opinion, the most interesting posts come from stef@apple.com.
She's thoughtful, articulate, and witty--a clear, strong signal in a
cacophony of noise.

Matt

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: buick@belay (Patrick D. Buick)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: Belay Enterprises Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 18:44:53 GMT

In article <kiran.714655313@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>>Didn't know that one needed a dark side to date. what kind of men do u know/
>>date????
>
>I don't date men.
>-- 
>Kiran Wagle                             <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
>P.O.Box 2083 Bloomington IN 47402-2083                  (812) 335-0420

Hmm... this *must* be a requirement... us Nice Guys (tm) just don't
seem exciting enough or something... :-)
Patrick
-- 
==========================================================
Patrick D. Buick EMT, EET  | Internet: buick%belay@uunet.uu.net
Belay Enterprises Inc.     | Internet: buickp@cuug.ab.ca
Calgary, Alberta, Canada   | UUCP:...!calgary!pixel!belay!buick
From: keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Can we can the suck-up bit?
Keywords: encourage friendship?
Date: 2 Sep 92 21:59:56 GMT
Organization: California-Nevada Methodist Homes

In article <1992Sep1.154037.13101@u.washington.edu> intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing) writes:
>
>Angelwing -  I do draw the line at dropping hankies.

See here folks? ^^^^^^^^ This is why I like Angelwing's
posts.  These little comments she puts at the end of 
her posts always sum up her feelings at the time.  She
is absolutely a classy lady!  Thanks Angelwing! --Keith


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Subject: Re: Powerful forces of nature conspire
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 19:00:00 GMT

In article <ewillims.715020154@unix1.tcd.ie> ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
>	Well, what is the point in living if you only look on the bad 
>side of things all the time?
>Yes, I have sunk up to the top of my cute little boots in slush but as
>I was intelligent to wear waterproof ones it didn't matter. Yes, it is 
>pretty horrible when it turns black and mushy but the joy I get from
>snow more than outweighs its negative aspects.
>	And half the fun of being out in the snow *IS bundling yourself
>up warm...then you can enjoy it without feeling numb!

Well, I wouldn't exactly call what you wear in the winter bundling up!

>That's not so hot either!

It is when you dress for winter, honey. :)

(I love taking your quotes out of context)
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Las Vegas
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:59:38 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Aug24.230857.20036@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> spg@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Stephen P. Guthrie) writes:
>I'm feeling very left out. How do I go about receiving one of these
>interesting letters?

Change your name to Stephanie.
-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Desperation (was Re: Commitment--The C-word?)
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:36:00 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <kiran.715317409@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>>kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Me) writes:
>>>>diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>
>Well then my theory is out to lunch.  I hope it's having pizza at Sally's.
>Fresh tomato, basil, mozarella, garlic--yum.  Worth the drive to New
>Haven.  The neon parking garage & the Dodo are cool too.

Darn it, will you all stop talking about food?  I'm hungry and broke.
Fresh tomatoes... sigh.  Anybody in the Durham area know of a good place
for pizza and wings?  If so, wanna go out for some?  Or Chinese food?

>>>people who are totally self-sufficient don't need partners by definition).  
>
>you must be utterly and absolutely an island before you are even ready
>to contemplate romantic relationships.  (I on the other hand think you
>should be a Wombat.)

But doesn't *total* self-sufficiency imply no need for another person?  I'm
pretty self-sufficient, but not *totally* so.  People who are utter and
absolute islands ususally don't have much time or interest to spare.
I want someone mostly self-sufficient, but still human enough to need
the occasional backrub, cuddle, etc.  (I don't want to be someone's mom,
but I also don't want to be someone's scenery; nice to have around, but
not particularly important).

>Kiran Wagle     <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>     (812) 335-0420

				Diamond (or Beth)