HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing)
Subject: Re: Las Vegas
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 21:59:25 GMT

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.

Yup .... I did.  Talk about broad band come-on mode, eh?

Angelwing - Pathetic ...uh, not *me* you understand, the letter

*------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Angelwing       |  "And just where do you think you're going     *
* U. of Washington|   dressed like *that*?                         *
*                 |                            -  My Dad           *
*------------------------------------------------------------------*




Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: zcjm0f@wwnv42.uucp (CJohn Mace)
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (longer then a midwest freight train)
Keywords: n
Organization: Amoco Production
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 21:09:40 GMT

>>> In fact, if you can't get out of the habit of mainly posting huge
>>> line-by-line rebuttals, you should save net bandwidth and use your
>>> time to go out and try to find a life, because I promise you that
>>> fewer people are going to trouble themselves offering you advice.
>>
>>Funny - I asked my girlfriend what Kevin should do, and she said,
>>   Get off the fucking computer and go out and get a life!
>>
>>Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
> 
> Does she have a sister?
>
yeah, but she has a beard like Grizzly Adams!!  :-)


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter)
Subject: Re: How to not look smart (was Re: Various ramblings...
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:56:11 GMT

nobody writes:
>Fred! You forgot the context. Kevin needs to find a way that will get
>him a woman. Who cares if he is called a smart alec in the process?

I've noticed that people who are smart alecs are not generally well liked
(at least by the people who do the name calling).

>Given your complaints on the net, your advice hasn't worked for you.

My complaints aren't about *not* 'getting' women, but about the women
I do 'get' and/or interact and/or have sex with. There's a difference.

Mind you, Kevin's better off (I'm better off :-) remaining celebit and single
then having relationships like those I've complained about (which is a
function of what I find attractive, and not a function of the advice I give).

>Hmm....if you talk about your intellect, you are called a smart alec. If you
>talk about your millions, you are called a millionaire.

People can not get smarter. (Not much anyways).
People can get richer.

	fred
-- 
Disclaimer: everything I write is my *personal* opinion and does not represent
or reflect the opinion of the company which employs me.
From: kgorman@star-trek.bbn.com (Karen Gorman)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: 032 Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 21 Aug 1992 04:15:54 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Reply-To: kgorman@BBN.COM (Karen Gorman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: archive.bbn.com


In article <a7#n9hf.greg@netcom.com> greg@netcom.com (Greg Bullough) writes:
>In article <66#nd7c.barry@netcom.com> barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:
>>In article <92232.48427.6069870@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM> 6069870@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
>>>In article <m70mw6l.barry@netcom.com> barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:

>>>>	I wanna be a woman next time around.
>>>
>>>Why wait until next time around?

>>
>>	Still some "E" tickets in this body I wanna use up.
>>

>Then again, if you remember, really remember, what an "E" ticket is, 
>you're on the way towards washed-up.




Get bent!!




Karen
Kg@bbn.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: Various ramblings...
Organization: I can't see any in the immediate vicinity...
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 20:29:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.170323.662@zooid.guild.org> Ross Ridge <ross@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>>Well, yeah.  My point is that my financial situation rules out an entire
>>class of people that might otherwise be interested in me.
>
>You make $20k more than I do, and I don't have such pessimistic view
>of relationships as you do...  
[...]
>You make more money than
>quite a few people, and you expenses are considerably less, all in all
>I'd say you're richer than most people.

Are you accounting for my age here?  Are you accounting for my field of
expertise?  Even *after* you've accounted for my lower expenses, I'm
*still* making less than the average ENTRY LEVEL programmer.  If you
account for my lower expenses, my yearly income ends up being around
$27k.  Not too bad, but not *great*.

But I'm *not* complaining about my financial situation.  It is that way
because of the choices I've made: I value enjoying my work much more
than I value truckloads of money (well, if I have *sufficient* truckloads
of money, I can just "retire" and do whatever I please and get the best
of both worlds :-).

The reality remains: my *insufficiently high* income rules out an entire
class of people that might otherwise be interested in me, because I'm
not making enough money to support someone else.  But this has the advantage
of screening out "freeloaders".

>Unless you're only into super models, the amount of money you make is no
>excuse.  

Oh, good.  I get to play devil's advocate.

Not that I disagree with you or anything, Ross, but why do you suppose
the amount of money I'm making would make any difference to a supermodel?
I mean, if it doesn't make any difference to any of the other classes
of women...

And if it *does* make a difference to supermodels, why *wouldn't* it make
any difference to the other classes of women?

>>>Do you ever go to jazz clubs?
>>
>>I need to.  I don't know of any where the atmosphere isn't smoke-filled,
>>though, and I can't breathe in such an atmosphere.
>
>Do you have asthma?  Otherwise it is something you can get used to.

No asthma, but I nevertheless find it impossible to breathe in such an
atmosphere.  This, after repeated attempts.  I haven't a clue how others
manage to tolerate it.

>Relationships are very complex, too complex for anyone to
>understand.  

How can anyone possibly succeed at something they don't understand,
except through sheer luck?

>							Ross Ridge


-- 
				Kevin Brown

			    kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
			    kevin@taronga.taronga.com
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: California Here I Come, Again (San Diego, to be exact)
Date: 21 Aug 92 23:41:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Aug21.232929.20324@cbfsb.cb.att.com> sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein) writes:
>In article <BtBDvw.M2E@iat.holonet.net> cocoa@iat.holonet.net (little 'e') writes:
>
>>If you'd waited a week, I could've showed you around.  I'll be there Labor
>>Day weekend.

I do have 5 or the 7 days to myself.  Was thinking of driving up
the coast to L.A. and see some old neighbors.
>>
>>little 'e'

				guess
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Major problems
Date: 18 Aug 92 21:59:23 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

"Dump the bitch."
-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Subject: Re: Bananas 
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 17:26:50 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <1992Aug22.060029.19182@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome) writes:
>In article <1m_nn0#.aahz@netcom.com> aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius) writes:
>>
>>Don't worry.  Just deep-throat a banana, and you'll stand out *anywhere*
>>you go.
>
>Hey, I resemble that remark!  Just 'cause I can do neat party tricks doesn't
>mean that I stand out or get offers of attention; in fact, that particular
>trick tends to intimidate men (or maybe it's the fact I'm sensible and don't
>take myself too seriously -- it can't be my looks).

So.  Was it peeled or unpeeled?
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

"I 'got a life'.  Now what?"
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Bathsheba.Grossman@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Bathsheba Grossman)
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 05:34:40 GMT

In article <thurlow.714191780@convex.convex.com> thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes:
>Okay - what are the odds that someone will deep-throat a banana when
>I'm up in Boston next time? :-)

Nobody ever comes to Philadelphia.  And the things I could show you. 
The sensuous sculpture, that inflames even my dried-up Jewish AbEx
department head.  The dremel tool.  The world's finest rubber lizards,
made by an unsung, brokenhearted Taiwanese genius.  The leg hair, the
marabou boa.  Well your loss tootsen.

Go ahead, wimp out.  Settle for the thin meat of USENET.  Ha.  
Or be truly manly - Contradiction 12, 10/2-3, Niagara Falls.

ObAdvice: I've said it before, I'll say it again, what I tell you three
times is true: Move out of your parents' house.  Unless there's a wine
steward on staff, or Papa's a generous-hearted pederast, it's the romantic
kiss o'death <Smek>.  I don't care how poor you are, I'm still right: get
roommates instead.

-Sheba
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: allisson@turing.toronto.edu (Allisson Roome)
Subject: Re: deformities and perversions
Keywords: selectivity, sociobiology, complexity
Organization: Some and growing
Date: 19 Aug 92 20:33:31 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.221745.29176@cbnews.cb.att.com> eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (eleanor.j.evans) writes:
>In article <kiran.714123385@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>
>>Hmm, this seems to confirm what a friend said recently: that women
>>find men they like physically attractive.  Well, I guess there are two
>>such women.
>
>Make that 3.  Of course, I find attractive almost anything on 2 legs with 
>a sense of humour and a huge dollop of intelligence.  Or, wait, didn't
>that just define what I like?  Hm....

Make it 4 - I also like your description of what you find attractive,
El - I find intelligent men such a turn on (there's more to it than
that but it's a good start)

Allisson
-- 
allisson@turing.toronto.edu (new address) H. Allisson Roome
"Everything that you teach you are learning. Teach only love, and
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:03:26 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  <1992Aug19.100202.4598@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>  ron@turing.toronto.edu (Ron Wessels) writes:
>
> There are very few foods that cannot be improved by the addition of
>      - more chocolate
>      - more garlic
> or     - more cheese

Chocolate-garlic-cheesecake anyone?

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 12 Aug 92 18:02:15 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <l8if21INNr0u@news.bbn.com> dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>She was a sexual surrogate.  That meant sometimes having sex with men
>who had sexual problems so she could teach them to overcome their 
>difficulties.    [  ...it is now illegal...  ]
>
>According to my friend anyway, this has a lot more to do with AIDS than
>it does with the efficacy or ethics of the counseling.

As for efficacy, it probably does what hundreds of hours of counceling
can't do for some people - namely, to convince them that they, too,
can get through this sticky business, just like the rest of the human
race.  Nothing succeeds like success, even if it is a "setup".

-- 
Steve Swann                 |    Speak to me in many voices; make
swann@acsu.buffalo.edu      |      them all sound like one...  -BOC
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Exactly what I mean by "unattached"...
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 17:40:35 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.052503.29487@nuchat.sccsi.com> kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>
>Now, most of the women I've talked to (yes, yes, I know there may be some
>exceptions to this on the net.  I'm talking about women I've talked to
>in person) seem to think that it would be ideal to make friends with
>someone first, *then* start a romance after the friendship is firmly
>established.  Presumably, of course, to determine compatibility issues
>and all that.
>
>But I discovered that in Real Life (tm), it doesn't work like that.  Instead,
>what happens is that I make friends with them, the friendship is established,
>and then they say that they couldn't even conceive of a romance with me
>because I'm too much like a brother to them.  I also discovered, in talking
>to my male friends, that they had experienced *exactly* the same thing.

Either that, or in Real Life (tm), by becoming friends with them, you've
gone from a stranger who didn't interest them sexually or romantically
to a friend who doesn't interest them sexually or romantically.  In
general, you can expect that most people will not be romantically/sexually
interested in the majority of MOTAS they meet; on the other hand, the
percentage of MOTAS that they meet that they might want as a friend,
particularly if the MOTAS in question made an effort to be one, is likely
to be much higher.  Consequently, (drawing on a little probability and
statistics) we can expect that most people will not be interested in a
romantic relationship with most of their friends of the appropriate
sex(es).

Indeed, I think this model fits nicely enough with my own experience--
I've got friendships in which neither of us is interested in the other
in an R/S manner (I'm going to start abbreviating Romantic/Sexual now);
I have friends who I would be very interested in who are not interested
in me; I've got friends who are intereted in me in a R/S manner but whom
I'm not interested in; and I've got friendships in which a level of R/S
interest is present in both parties, some of which have even gone from
nonsexual to sexual back to nonsexual to sexual etc.

On the whole I'm not convinced that you're really taking that much risk
of missing out on a sexual relationship that otherwise could have 
happened just by becoming friends with someone--sometimes it probably
just looks that way, since many women prefer to be at least a little
tactful and "I don't want to date you because I think of you like a
brother" is so much more polite than "I don't want to date you because
the thought of seeing you naked makes my skin crawl."

Trygve
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjj@mits.mdata.fi (Joni Jarvenkyla)
Subject: Re: Psychobibble/bible
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 22:35:28 GMT

Kevin is just experiencing something called acid anemia.

Long live the myth of reality!

-- 
jjj@mits.mdata.fi     Thanks, Life; thanks, Death    And the other me:
jjj@niksula.hut.fi    for freeing me from self       Jenny L{rv{joki
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: greg@netcom.com (Greg Bullough)
Subject: Re: Ugly hands
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 02:01:19 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article <1992Aug16.191149.8058@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>In an earlier posting, which I've lost, Dawn Hardin mentioned "ugly hands."
>What characteristics make hands ugly?  Part of my interest stems from the
>fact that the palm of my right hand is mildly atavistic.

Better than hirsute.
 
Greg
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: walter (Walter Lego)
Subject: Re: Married Men and Single Women
Followup-To: soc.singles
Reply-To: nobody
Organization: Twisted Pair Inc.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 12:57:11 GMT

In article <BsuK9o.FqJ@acsu.buffalo.edu> swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann) writes:
>My female friends say the following about it:
>
>The guy in question is more of a "good bet", if some other women
>already consider him to be "acceptable" (enough to go out clubbing
>with him, at any rate).
>
>It eases the problem of "how do I know he's not a psycho?".  If he has
>friends, some of whom are women, that's not much of a worry.

As long as they can judge the women that are his friends. But even then,
a very large number of killers and rapists that you read about have had 
live-in girlfriends when they were caught. Some endorsement.


					Walter

What disclaimer?
From: tyger@netcom.com (Kitty in the Middle)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Email of the Week
Date: 17 Aug 92 19:58:23 GMT
Organization: I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything!

In article <14053@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>In article <1992Aug13.171156.12203@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>|>
>|>Well, to start with, she did suggest that his brains be blown out.
>|>
>|>Secondly, seems to me that if her note to this guy was in a similar vein
>|>to his response then she can hardly complain.
>
>You ever hear of an arguementative technique called "exaggeration to 
>absurdity"?  He wrote something stupid and to prove how stupid it was she
>responded with a suggested that was "exaggeration to absurdity".  No one
>in their right mind would believe that us blowing his brains out would be
>a reasonable solution to his "problem".

Thanks, John!

I somehow managed to miss this one, but I would have said much the same thing.
Anyone who believed that Nance was really going to blow *anyone's* head off has
their head firmly lodged in their anal sphincter.

> John Fereira            

  Tyger

-- 
      Kristen Kohlbecker    And I would choose to be with you
      tyger@netcom.com      That's if the choice were mine to make   
                            But you can make decisions too
      A Tyger and a Lady    And you can have this heart to break 
 
                       
        
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: greg@netcom.com (Greg Bullough)
Subject: Re: single men
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 06:24:10 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article <1992Aug13.133101.26893@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
>
>When we are little wee bearn.

Thass "bairn," lass. 
 
Greg
From: ng@MOE.OPTICS.ROCHESTER.EDU (Baldwin Ng)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: REQUEST from GIRLS:  List of 20 WORST/UNORIGINAL ways to ask a girl out
Date: 17 Aug 92 19:23:52 GMT


Hello to all!

I am interested to compile a list of "TOP 20 WORST/UNORIGINAL ways to ask a
freshman girl out" for the incoming freshman guys here at U of Rochester.
Any input/suggestion/experience??  I will pick the 20 ways from all your
replies that I think are THE WORST/FUNNY and post it up in "soc.college" at the
end of this month!

Thanks in advance!

Baldwin
(ng@moe.optics.rochester.edu)

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Romance
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 13:33:53 GMT


Yesterday my best bud and I had a talk about the amount of romance
in our relationship.  Usually when I mention that "R" word he looks
at me as though I've asked him to sodomize my cat, but this time we
actually had a nice talk about it.  He said that since he doesn't have
much practice at being romantic he's not sure he's going to do the
right thing and how I'll take it, so he just doesn't.

On gift-giving, for instance.  He feels that if he buys me flowers or
jewelry or clothing there is a chance he won't match my taste.  If he
gets me something he *knows* I need or will use, like a radar detector
or portable CD player or a ceiling fan for my bedroom (WITH installation
mind you), it's a sure-win that I'm going to like it and get use out of it.

I had to fall for Mr. Practical.  Anyway ...

This morning we're having coffee and I flip open the September issue of
New Woman magazine and there on page 72 begins an article that just about
mirrored our conversation.  I don't remember the actual title OR author
but it's about bringing romance back into your relationship.  What
it says, in short, is don't bother.  If your partner is practical, love
them for it and be happy they love *you.*

It's a good article, and recommended reading if the subject is an
issue for you.

-Nance
"It's a personal CD player!  You said you wanted something personal!" -mhc
-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
                            (_) \(_)
From: wsanders@ffeine.Sun.COM (Wiley Sanders)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: A (new?) twist on LJBF
Date: 15 Aug 1992 00:27:28 GMT
Organization: Tradeshow Tech Support
NNTP-Posting-Host: ffeine.corp.sun.com

In article <1992Aug14.023732.1524756@zeus.calpoly.edu> jemenake@zeus.calpoly.edu (Joe Emenaker) writes:
>
>Women, how would you feel if your SO didn't want to get married. 
   Silly, she's not an SO unless you're at least headed in that
direction, at least somewhat, you know. Then, if she's not really an
SO, "LJBF" can mean the only thing it's meant by those females 
of my experience:
                        "F * * K  O F F !"
  (Do I have a bad attitude? Of course! )
  I've said "LJBF" to a few women and we stayed friends for better
or worse. All those women have gotten married, and we stay in touch
more or less.
  But for all the women who have said "LJBF" to me, it was The End.
To paraphrase a recent example, "I have a bad habit of falling for
guys who aren't what I really want, so L.J.B.F." And off she was
ISO the next candidate.
  I don't know whether it signifies a severe misreading of the other
person's intentions or whether there are more women than I think
who want to field test before they've read the specs, if you know
what I mean and I think you do.
  I certainly have women friends with whom the sexual
communication is clear, i.e. we are truly friends and not interested
in each other sexually, for whom "LJBF" will never be an issue.
-wiley
--
"What a waste it is to lose one's mind, or not to
have a mind as being wasteful. How true that is."     -Dan Quayle
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: The myriad uses of hot tubs (was: Re: FINNS - Nice description, Juha!)
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 18:23:14 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.222818.29455@cbnews.cb.att.com> eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (eleanor.j.evans) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.214849.2981@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>>  (One problem, though, is 
>>that sometimes one partner may get overheated and need to cool off;
>>this is best accomplished by the hotter partner sitting on the edge 
>>of the hot tub while the other partner remains within and sees what
>>can be done with the first partner's anatomical areas that are still
>>in range.)
>
>This is your solution for overheating!!  Doesn't sound very, um,
>effective to me.

Well, it's effective, just not particularly fast--indeed, sometimes I've
found that it can take quite a long time to cool someone off in this
manner.