HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 30 Sep 92 14:42:24 GMT
	<ewright.717781394@convex.convex.com> <g+-pky_@lynx.unm.edu>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: blowfish@carina.unm.edu's message of 30 Sep 92 05:57:46 GMT

In article <g+-pky_@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:

   In article <ewright.717781394@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:

   >>Being fit (and I'm not talking a rippling mass of muscle, but even just
   >>very light exercise, I think its been said that 20 minutes a day, 3 times
   >>a week, or 100-120+ beats per minutes exercise is enough to keep even the
   >>average american in shape) has benefits- longer endurance, faster recovery
   >>time from injury, less suseptibility to diseases, etc.
   >But the average American gets that much exercise already, not even
   >counting the things he does for exercise.  Why, if he just walks the
   >dog, he probably gets 20 minutes of exercise a day.  Mowing the lawn
   >is another 20 minutes of exercise.

   Walking a dog or mowing a lawn does not increase ones heart rate to the
   necessary levels required.

Actually, it turns out that what used to be thought of as "non-aerobic"
exercise like slower walking still has good effects.  Perhaps not
*quite* as good as aerobic, but unlike Cooper's stuff first suggested,
there's no "switch" that turns usless exercise into useful exercise.

   Your attitudes towards fitness and exercise are >totally< fucked. There just
   simply is no other way to describe it. I've never seen anybody in my entire
   life display (publically) such a totally ignorant attitude. Amazing.

Come to North Carolina -- we've got a Senate race going on.
--
Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
H/3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am he who walks the States with a barb'd tongue, questioning every
one I meet,/Who are you that wanted only to be told what you knew
before?/ Who are you that wanted only a book to join you in your
nonsense?"  _Leaves of Grass_ xxiii.4.
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 30 Sep 92 01:12:26 GMT
	<ewright.717693983@convex.convex.com>
	<MARTINC.92Sep28210326@grover.cs.unc.edu>
	<ewright.717735910@convex.convex.com>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: ewright@convex.com's message of 29 Sep 92 03:05:10 GMT

In article <ewright.717735910@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:


   In <MARTINC.92Sep28210326@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:

   >There's plenty of evidence that those who exercise live longer, and
   >remain mentally active longer.  Doesn't take many years of life to
   >account for 2-3 hours a week of exercise.

   Which is irrelevent since the average person gets that much exercise
   just by walking the dog, mowing the lawn, shopping at the mall, etc.
   The type of exercise you recommend is on top of that, and the law of
   diminishing returns takes hold very quickly.

Ed, the *medical* data is quite clear: people who get *more* exercise
than the "average" person gets live longer.  It is extremely strong.  If
you really were a biologist you have the skills to evaluate the data.
If you can't be bothered, then you don't have an opinion worth stating.
--
Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
H/3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am he who walks the States with a barb'd tongue, questioning every
one I meet,/Who are you that wanted only to be told what you knew
before?/ Who are you that wanted only a book to join you in your
nonsense?"  _Leaves of Grass_ xxiii.4.
From: wall@hel4.brl.mil (Jeff Wall)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 30 Sep 92 21:01:27 GMT
 <ewright.717696345@convex.convex.com> <aa+p3aj@lynx.unm.edu> <ewright.717781394@convex.convex.com>
Organization: U.S. Army Human Engineering Lab  Aberdeen, MD

In article <ewright.717781394@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V.
Wright) writes:
>In <aa+p3aj@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>
>>Being fit (and I'm not talking a rippling mass of muscle, but even just
>>very light exercise, I think its been said that 20 minutes a day, 3 times
>>a week, or 100-120+ beats per minutes exercise is enough to keep even the
>>average american in shape) has benefits- longer endurance, faster recovery
>>time from injury, less suseptibility to diseases, etc.
>
>But the average American gets that much exercise already, not even
>counting the things he does for exercise.  Why, if he just walks the
>dog, he probably gets 20 minutes of exercise a day.  Mowing the lawn
>is another 20 minutes of exercise.

I have to disagree with this.  I beleive the 20 minutes a day, 3 times a week
is in addition to the type of exercise Ed mentions.  True, it is exercise but a
 walker must walk much farther than a runner needs to run.  If you've never
raised your heart beat to 120 beats per minute and kept it there for 20 or 30
minutes it'll wipe you out.  For a person like me who works out at lunch I need
a shower before I can go back to work.  Must people don't need a shower when
they get back from walking the dog. 

>I probably get less exercise than 98-99% of all Americans.  Yet Charlie
>says that, according to his standards -- the standards of the DUMB Book 
>of Diet and Fitness -- I must be considered "reasonably fit."  On the
>other hand, Charlie also claims that a majority of Americans aren't fit.
>Do you see a contradication in here somewhere?

Basically, it sounds like you're active and not a couch potato (check my
spelling Dan??) but you're a long way from fit.  A person needs to hit that
target heart rate and maintain it before a person can expect any
cardiovascular(sp) conditioning.

I'd say your safe Ed.

Jeff Wall
wall@hel4.brl.mil
From: jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Engaged Psychobitch from Hell Syndrome
Date: 25 Sep 92 19:31:28 GMT
	<ewillims.717173729@unix1.tcd.ie> <19psfpINNa7h@uwm.edu>
	<ewillims.717330108@unix1.tcd.ie> <lc3ko3INN52j@news.bbn.com>
Organization: Bear, Stearns & Co. - FAST
In-reply-to: dhardin@bbn.com's message of 24 Sep 92 14:38:59 GMT


In article <lc3ko3INN52j@news.bbn.com> dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:

   So what do you think of this situation?  I was seriously depressed, and
   going through a really bad time.  My best friend was in another state 
   finishing graduate school and couldn't come around to help me.  We were
   on the phone for another midnight tears session when she suddenly said
   that she wanted me to sleep with her fiancee.  It would cheer me up, it
   would cheer him up (since LDR's are a pain, he was down too) and it would
   make her feel good to know she'd helped us both out.   I don't think her 
   offer (I said no thanks, BTW) made her commitment to her fiancee any less.  
   I don't think his willingness to go along with it made his commitment to 
   her any less.  They're married now, so what makes their less commitment 
   any less serious?

Dawn, I think that your best friend has two of the strongest
relationships I have ever seen -- both her relationship with her
fiancee, and her relationship with you, show complete trust.  They
show honest compassion.  If anything, I think this makes their
commitment even stronger -- it indicates a commitment to do whatever
it takes so that each succeeds.

You are very lucky to have such a friend.

Spidey!!!


--
 /\ \  / /\  Josh Diamond                                          jmd@bear.com
//\\ .. //\\ AKA Spidey!!!                        ...!ctr.columbia.edu!ursa!jmd
//\((  ))/\\
/  < `' >  \                                              Do whatever it takes.
From: parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Open letter to Edward V. Wright
Date: 1 Oct 92 00:45:40 GMT
Reply-To: parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz
Organization: Wellington City Council, Wgtn, NZ
NNTP-Posting-Host: blade.wcc.govt.nz

In article <1992Sep30.214929.10283@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>In article <1acqocINNm9c@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep30.170701.1568@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>>>I'm not going to try to argue your concepts of the value (or lack
>(lots of crap deleted)
 
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
>Or even this more streamlined example from another great, unfinished,
>American novel....
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Am I the only person around here who's sick of this?

This thread seems to be particularly resistant to "set seen/thread"







>Trygve   (However, I refuse to type in the 100,000-word record-breaking
>          sentence with my tongue this time.) 

(chuckle)





Rachel                           "Supergoof!"
                                    -  -
                                    O  O
                                      >
                                     \_/
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 15:11:38 GMT

In article <BvnA2E.C1J@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>
>There are was one important event that had to precede human agriculture, 
>i.e., the end of the last Ice Age (actually the beginning of the present
>inter-glacial period; the Ice Age could resume at any time).  The current
>view is that plant farming began with the accidental selection of certain
>strains of cereals and the gradual domestication of other animals following
>the successful experience with the wolf/dog.
>
>>ASSUMING [Neanderthals have  died  out], something on which I'm still not 
>>completely resolved.
>
>Well, from the neck down the Neanderthals were pretty much indistinguishable
>from us, but they did have heavier brow ridges.  Looking at two skulls, it's
>easy to tell which is which.  Their skulls were also somewhat thicker.  Today
>there is a group with heavier brow ridges and thicker skulls on average;
>they are called male humans.  (It's more sexual dimorphism.)

	Did Neanderthals have dogs, or is domestication more recent than  
them?

	Ever notice how lousy the lifestyle of males  is in many other
species? Thank god the sexual dimorphism in humans is (Under many modes
of post-agricultural culture) in the males' favour: I *could* have been 
a male spider, or one of those fish who fertilise their sisters and die,
prior to birth.

							James Nicoll
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rthoff@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au (Rudolph van't Hoff)
Subject: Re: Help, What Is Wrong With ME?(I'M NEW)
Organization: University of Tasmania at Launceston
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 06:54:04 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.210726.21805@fid.morgan.com>, sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
>
>Besides, even the way you want it interpreted sounds like you got
>divorced at age 15 or 16.
>Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
Well, not divorced as such, just "dropped" by my last girlfriend........

Later,

Rudolph......................

-- 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Scratch 'N' Sniff Section...|%% All return mail to:= The Phantom Mailer     %%% Scratch here - %&%&%&%&%&%& |%% rthoff@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au             %%
%                &%&%&%&%&%&% |%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%                %&%&%&%&%&%& |%% If the flavour fits, then sniff it......... %%%                &%&%&%&%&%&% |%% My systems Operator, who will remain anon   %%
% And remember a new flavour  |%% has said I'm naughty for having a large sig.%%% every week, guess this weeks|%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% and win the major prize.....|%% "Don't blame me, it wasn't me it was him..."%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From: epg@nature.Berkeley.EDU (little 'e' string)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Embarrasment of the Day
Date: 26 Sep 92 18:20:08 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Bourbon Street
NNTP-Posting-Host: nature.berkeley.edu

In article <JMD.92Sep23153405@lion.bear.com> jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond) writes:
>
>In article <19p09vINNt81@agate.berkeley.edu> epg@nature.Berkeley.EDU (little 'e' string) writes:
>   ObPremt: Or perhaps I just don't have the type of *figure* my
>   accounting Prof is interested in. :)
>
>Of course, you are presuming that your accounting prof is interested
>in female bodies more than he is interested accounting...

Actually, my accounting prof is married and his wife is having their
first child really soon.  He told us that he is planning on getting a
beeper, and that if he rushes out of class on night, we'll know why.

So I guess some things are more important to accountants than 
accounting. :)

Just me,

little 'e'

And he said "hey Baby, let's take a ride"
"We'll stand on the cliff's edge side by side."
"Got no time to smell the coffee."
"And anyway it's the rush that counts."  - little 'e'
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 30 Sep 92 01:22:51 GMT
	<ewright.717693983@convex.convex.com> <1a9ic5INN75c@uwm.edu>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu's message of 29 Sep 92 12:32:05 GMT

In article <1a9ic5INN75c@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:

   (Didn't Charlie say he was NOT active in any way?)

Well, not quite, but you're closer than Ed's getting.  I *try* to get
"enough" exercise, but I probably don't quite.  Sometimes yes, sometimes
no. 
--
Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
H/3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am he who walks the States with a barb'd tongue, questioning every
one I meet,/Who are you that wanted only to be told what you knew
before?/ Who are you that wanted only a book to join you in your
nonsense?"  _Leaves of Grass_ xxiii.4.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 15:39:23 GMT

In article <5608@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>
>Ed, this brings to mind something I've been wanting to ask you.  
>
>Why do you like to read/post on soc.singles?  Please do not interpret this
 
How dare you raise you eyes to Eddie. You will pay dearly.
 
>as an attempt to 'run you out' of the group; you have as much right
 
How dare you attempt to hide the truth of Eddie by running out of this
pagan group. Agghhuuummmmmm. Eddie. Ediieeee Eddiiieeeeee.
 
>to be here as I do, and it a sick sort of way your posts do make 
>interesting reading.  However, you clearly feel that certain people
>(chiefly Charlie, but some others) are out to get you for some reason,
 
 They are out to get the Master and you are one of them. them.them.
 You are one of the ignorant. Until your main means of
applying make up is a weed whacker do not lokk upon Eddieeeeeeeee.
 
>and in general you seem to feel that the group is hostile to you and
>your point of view.  Personally, I wouldn't want to hang around somewhere
>if I thought many of the people there were malevolent and that they
>disliked me.
 
 The master thinks not of himself but of benefitting the animals. Until
you have experienced his point you are but a child. Eddie. Eddieeeee. Eddieeee.
 
>
>One is forced to conclude you get some kind of satisfaction out of these
>discussions.  But what kind?  I mean, Ed, assuming you can bury us all under
>the weight of your prose, that we become so fatigued by your constant
>and total noncomprehension that we finally give up and say, "Okay, Ed,
>none of the reasons you can't get women to go out with you are your fault,
 
 A light at the end of the tunnel. Another disciple to spread the word.
It is almost time to snatch the grasshopper from the masters paw.
Auuhhmmmmmmmm.
 
>it's because the vast majority of women are sports-happy and not very bright,
 
 You will sit at the right hand of the Master.
 
>and the 80 left over don't like your physique" (never mind that this is
>not consistent with the experiences of anyone here)- just say that you
>can get us to do this, what GOOD does it do you!?  Does God Almighty 
 
 Do I detect cynisism? Imposters will burn. Swear alliegence. Prostrate
yourself before he who does for others at a great expense to himself.
AAAAUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMMMMMMM. Father. Father. Fatherrrrrr.
 
>at last admit the error of his ways and award you a loving partner?
>
>Ed, maybe you ought to think about why you're spending so much of your
>time *here*, bitching, instead of spending it out there looking.  
>
>					--Diamond
 
 You Benedict Arnold. You Judas. You Jezebell. You will rue the day
you spoke your ignorant bilge to the Master. Prepare to learn the meaning
of Eddieized. I tried to warn you.
 

 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Dominance? (was: The Engagement Ring Question)
Date: 28 Sep 1992 01:48:48 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <1992Sep27.152900.20924@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>No, since it's the right-handed majority that defines the symbolism, and
>it's others who will be responding to the ring's signal.  To project
>dominance, wear the ring on the forefinger of the right hand.

Actually since it's the left-handed elite that takes the active role in
defining everything for the rest of homanity, it is really the truth that the
ring symbolizes the dominance of the wearer over the giver, and the offering of
the ring, a gesture of supplication.  This, of course, being true, because the
left hand is naturally the superior hand.
From: taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Engaged Psychobitch from Hell Syndrome
Date: 27 Sep 92 11:45:00 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki, Finland

ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
>sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
>>ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
>>
>>>How can anyone be "seriously committed" to a relationship and NOT be 
>>>monogamous?  
>>
>>I've seen it.  I don't know "how", but it is, therefore it is
>>possible.
>
>	I still reserve judgement till I've really seen it work
>myself...I've seen it attempted and end in total unmitigated
>disaster!

Just like any other relationship.

There's a high probability that any relationship will fail.  I don't
think that polygamous relationship is in a bigger risk than a
monogamous one.

Juha
-- 
Juha Taina | taina@cs.helsinki.fi | Phone: +358-0-708-4247
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:01:51 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <1992Oct1.140102.16959@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:

>Actually, Ed Wright has as much right to post here as anyone else and to
>start and contribute to discussions.  If people agree with or do not
>agree wite what he posts, followups are possible by hitting "F".

I know Ed has as much right to post here as anyone else, and far be
it from me to try to hinder him in any way.  However, I myself have
a right; the right to ignore him.  

>Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
>att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
>                            (_) \(_)                           


					--Diamond

diamond@acpub.duke.edu |   Let your mind go and your body will follow.
Elizabeth S. Abrams    |
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 28 Sep 92 14:18:54 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Sep26.184716.1921@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
> 
>Oh, nothing too much--Charlie was mentioning the best way to get him hot
>of her birthday suit; and Keith Garrard actually admitted that he thought
>that Angelwing was hot.
>
>Trygve   (Did I skip anything?) 
 
The naekkit pictures of her boss is all I can think of.
They didn't do a thing for me. YMMV.

 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: nadel@attatash.aero.org (Miriam Nadel)
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 20:33:12 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.140852.17299@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
>From what John said, he *did* spend several hours with her, talking and
>getting to know her, and he said that his initial impression was that
>she was attractive and VERY nice, but wasn't interested in the things
>he liked.  His saying she was "fat" was a sort of crude way of summarizing
>that he felt they had nothing in common.

Wouldn't it have been somewhat more reasonable for him to say that they
didn't have anything in common?

Is he open to the possibility that someone might be fat and have something in
common with him?

I admit that if I were telling a person why I didn't want to go out with him, 
I'd not be likely to say certain things that I'd tell a friend.  For example,
I might tell a friend who asked "how did your date last night go?" something
like "he was awful.  He has poor personal hygiene, interrupted me constantly,
and has a weird laugh" while (if said creature) called me I'd say something
like "I don't think we have much in common."  


Miriam Nadel
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: cotton@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (carol.jean.swanson)
Subject: Friend needs to meet singles/NJ
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: nj
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:06:19 GMT

Hi:

Just curious....
I have a single friend (female and it's not me) who wants to meet
single men.  She doesn't like bars  and I think dating
agencys are not an option.   Seems like there's lots of guys where
she works, but meeting them seems impossible.  They hide or something.
Seems like the couples all met at school.

ANYWAY.

Is there anything she can
do or anyplace to go in NJ to meet single men? 
I haven't been much of a help 'cause all the people I know
are married or live out of state.  

(By the way, she's in her late 20s, likes to travel, likes cats and dogs,
has good sense of humor, cute, slender AND has a GREAT job 
that she is doing very well at.  She's also shoot me if she knew I
posted this....).

PLEASE RESPOND VIA EMAIL. I DON'T READ THIS GROUP
VERY OFTEN. 

-- Carol M
cotton\@cbnewsi.att.com