HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: On Being Single
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 03:09:06 GMT

martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
] Being "single" I presume implies "not in a monogamous relationship" or
] at least "not in a committed long term relationship" whether we mean Ed
] Wright the pinnacle of human evolution or Ugh the Cave Person.

I think it would be safer to start with the 
bare bones minimum of:

"Not Currently in a Contractual Arrangement with
another Person, such as is exclusionary of other
personal relationships with a potential or actual
sexual component."

Like yourself, I am divorced, and hence no longer in
a contractual arrangement, as stipulated above. Hence
I am 'single' - I am in a Protracted arrangment with
a ProblemOlderWoman, But until she finishes the
preliminary readings, including, but not limited to
Hofstatder's GEB, we are not in a position to discuss
the nature of Completeness or Closure.

{There is also the backlog of things like Wittgenstein,
and some Whitehead and Russell, not to mention the whole
ongoing theme of the Use and Evolution of Small Arms in
the progression of Small Unit Tactics...}

[I've decide this time, that I will make sure that we
get the CORRECT STUFF into the contract before we 
sign anything!!!!!]

So I would prefer to refer to myself as being single
with a distraction, in what is currently a protracted
series of negotiations as to the Prolegomena of any
future epistemological clarification of such semantically
evaluable strings as will clarify the nature of the 
ongoing arrangement, as may be subsequently supported
within the clearly defined and defendable ethics, as is
consistent with the Available Ontology.


ciao
drieux

ps: glad to clear that up....

obRomance: Its fun to use obscure references to kant....


-- 
MajorModernDayProblems: 

sometimes, a thing will happen after another thing, 
and they may not be connected..... 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thomas@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Beagle)
Subject: Re: SM ISO SF For Head Games
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 23:58:19 GMT
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.

In article <1k7dodINN6o4@lynx.unm.edu> hays@TECHNET.NM.ORG writes:
>In article <1993Jan26.144242.9029@spectrum.xerox.com>,
>eradm.wbst845e@xerox.com (Erik Radmall) writes:
>>Okay, someone said they'd like to see a post from a SM looking for
>>head games. Well here I am! I enjoy making you feel small, _real_ small.
>>[...]
>>I _know_ you're out there! I look forward to your replies!
>
>On the one hand, as a serious, insightful personal ad, this failed miserably.

Yes, agreed.

>On the other hand, as a campy, over-the-top, sacrcastic piece of humor,
>this failed miserably.

Well, I liked it quite a lot.

Seems to be both topical and appropriate to the group.

Signed,
	net.young.fuck


-- 
    Thomas Beagle | thomas@datamark.co.nz           Work: 64 4 233 8186
 Technical Writer | thomas@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz     Home: 64 4 499 3832
   Wellington, NZ |   A man without a woman is like tea without sugar.
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.romance
From: diana@wetware.com (CatWoman )
Subject: Re: On Being Single
Organization: Castle WetWare MouseCatcher
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 19:36:38 GMT

martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:

] drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
] 
]    martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
]    ] Being "single" I presume implies "not in a monogamous relationship" or
]    ] at least "not in a committed long term relationship" whether we mean Ed
]    ] Wright the pinnacle of human evolution or Ugh the Cave Person.
] 
]    I think it would be safer to start with the 
]    bare bones minimum of:
] 
]    "Not Currently in a Contractual Arrangement with
]    another Person, such as is exclusionary of other
]    personal relationships with a potential or actual
]    sexual component."
] 
]    Like yourself, I am divorced, and hence no longer in
]    a contractual arrangement, as stipulated above. Hence
]    I am 'single' - I am in a Protracted arrangment with
]    a ProblemOlderWoman, But until she finishes the
]    preliminary readings, including, but not limited to
]    Hofstatder's GEB, we are not in a position to discuss
]    the nature of Completeness or Closure.
] 
] What I want to know is if that means you're in a protracted relationship
] with Aahz by transitivity.

Nope - it means that he spends his "free time"
with me while I draw complete circles around
him.

Oh - that was protracTED, not protracTOR...

Okay - he spends his free time explaining to
my cats why they aren't supposed to be doing
the "live performance" of Schroedinger(sp?).

Diana
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Diane)
Subject: Re: Breeding Strategy (was meeting women in clubs)
Organization: University of Missouri
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 16:49:10 CST

In article <8895@news.duke.edu>
diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
 
>In article <JMD.93Jan20141137@lion.bear.com> jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond) writes:
>>When was the last time you saw a gorilla write a computer
>>program?  For that matter, when was the last time you saw a gorilla
>>start a war?
>
>And when was the last time you gained breeding access to your next-door
>neighbor by eating her young?
>
 
You're being completely UNfair! Josh hasn't done that in *months*!!!!
(have you, Josh?)
 
Diane
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Credibility and Trueness
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:18:20 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 <MARTINC.93Jan27194857@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:

>   Szasz has repudiated his best-known book?  Wow.

>"Repudiated" may be a little strong.  But he's certainly been quoted as
>recognizing now that schizophrenia, bipolar illness, and some of the
>other such things have biochemical bases and are therefore "real".

All behaviors, presumeably, have a biochemical basis and are therefore
"real."  It does not follow that having a biochemical basis makes a
behavior a disease.  Cellular respiration has a biochemical basis --
does that make it a disease?


>Further, he's been quoted as admitting that the way that the treatment
>of the mentally ill changed after the book -- like de-institutionalizing
>schizophrenics -- was *not* what he expected.

So?  Did he claim that he could predict the future of government policy?
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer)
Subject: Re: What Drieux has to Say about this
Summary: Just a Joke!
Keywords: Gay Joke!
Organization: The Tickle Palace - Moonyvale, CA
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 08:33:34 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.221414.23415@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>
>] In article <1993Jan19.235656.25710@hubcap.clemson.edu> smersch@eng.clemson.edu writes:
>] >I'll tell you.  Never feel sad just because you're
>] >not dating someone.  It's not that big of a deal.
>] >I got into a relationship with a woman that I had
>] >made to be a great person in my mind because I
>] >was lonely.  She ended up putting me in the 
>] >hospital.
>] 
>] Wonder what drieux will have to say about >this<....
>] r.
>
>
>Just Say NO! to Hetro!
>
>its cureable you know.
>

     Just Say YES to Homo!

     I don't think so because it is yucky, yucky, yucky.

-- 
    Reggie elected into Hall of Fame!    +---------------------------------+
  +-----------------------------------+ /  Snowmobiling: Catch the fever! /
 /   //  W. David Rohwer     // Amiga ++---------------------------------+
|  \X/        Go A's       \X/  3000  /  Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM  /
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Trygve's shower
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 07:25:18 GMT

In article <9009@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>>Trygve   (I'm still working on the plans for a bathroom built like a
>>          bathroom should be--great big tub with an enclosure built 
>>          around and above it (current plan is for cobalt blue tile)
>>          with three shower heads, recessed reading lights, a fold-out
>>          reading table, little shelves to put the candles on, a
>>          reasonable but mostly invisible stereo, and, well, other 
>>          stuff--maybe when that gets built it'll help my relative
>>          position.)
>
>Oh, my.
>
>I happen to have a weakness for well-designed bathing areas.  When you
>get it finished, let me know if you need someone to help scrub your 
>back.

Oh, I imagine I will--but I oughtto warn you that I enjoy having someone
scrub my front even more.  

Trygve   (As long as it's done slowly and gently--personally, I think
          it would border on the criminal to hurry a bath taken in the
          tub I'm planning.)

P.S.  Hope you don't have anything against "Mister Bubble." 
--
As you may have noticed, netnews seems to be working today.  There are
no estimates as to when it will be back down, so please do not call us
up every half hour asking.  All available support personel were called
as soon as news started getting through without problems and they have
been working round the clock to try to isolate the functioning component.
One of them recalls a time a few years back when mail started working
reliably and they think the sudden functioning of netnews may have a
related cause.  As soon as this component is identified, a replacement
will be ordered from the supplier.  Thank you for your patience.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Trygve's shower
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 00:55:43 GMT

In article <9027@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>In article <1993Jan24.072518.4694@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>
>>Oh, I imagine I will--but I oughtto warn you that I enjoy having someone
>>scrub my front even more.  
>
>I consider myself warned.

Well, I always like to be considerate.  I am, incidentally, perfectly
willing to reciprocate, but since I don't have nearly as much practice
soaping up your front and making sure it's properly cleaned as you do,
it'll probably take me quite a bit longer than you're accustomed to.
(Don't worry, though; just be patient and I'm sure I'll figure it all out.) 

>>Trygve   (As long as it's done slowly and gently--personally, I think
>>          it would border on the criminal to hurry a bath taken in the
>>          tub I'm planning.)
>>
>>P.S.  Hope you don't have anything against "Mister Bubble." 
>
>Slow and gentle sounds fine, although I will say that my loofa sponge
>feels awfully good rubbed briskly (though not roughly) all over one's back
>and shoulders.  (This may be particularly appealing to me because I have dry
>skin which constantly itches, but I've had positive reviews from others
>as well).  

Alas, I've never experiened your loofa sponge, so I can't say one way or
another.

Trygve
--
"The moon may be smaller than Earth, but it's further away."
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Flirting How To Guide/Backrubs
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 22:04:57 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.064613.29860@leland.Stanford.EDU> rna@leland.Stanford.EDU (Robert Ashcroft) writes:
>In article <C1ByvC.Cxp@CAM.ORG> souchay@CAM.ORG (Francois Souchay) writes:
>>
>>Hear, hear. I gotta say I fully agree with Aahz on this one. The backrub
>>criterion does help to sort out the folks who want/need massage from those
>>that don't. Robert prefers to avoid them ( from what I can tell ), so he'd
>>rather choose someone who feels the same way.
>
>Huh?  I don't like spinach much either.  Does this mean I avoid those who do?
>Tell me: I'm dying to know what my preferences are, since you seem to know
>so much more about me that I do.

Perhaps it was a little presumptuous to assume that you felt that way, but
it isn't that unreasonable an assumption, given how often differing feelings
about physical contact cause friction (or, worse, not enough friction) in a
relationship.  Like Aahz, I would be unlikely to enjoy a romantic
relationship with someone who wasn't given to being physically affectionate--
indeed, I've found through experience that if I'm involved with someone
who is not physically affectionate (in a generalized sense, not merely a
sexual sense) that I end up losing both romantic and sexual feelings for
this person.

Trygve   (Who particularly dislikes being supposed to box up his feelings
          and express them only in approved moments and in approved ways.)
--
"As tradition demands, the sun began to rise above the horizon, its thin
 crescent glowing pinkly as it peeked over the rim of the world at an
 hour far too inconvenient for its own good; beams of sunlight tiptoed
 around the pastel draperies to shine warmly upon the skin of Bernadine
 Lambert who was also glowing pinkly as she and her lover stirred
 sleepilly, limbs comfortably intertwined in a manner so strikingly like
 an octopus swept up in the onanistic frenzy of trying to dance
 cheek-to-cheek with itself that the videotapes later would cause
 Jacques Cousteau to blush and accidentally steer one of his ships into
 a buoy that through one of the most dramatic displays of synchonicity
 in the past century looked just like Opus the Penguin--and yet she knew
 that, like all other good things that ever have a chance to begin, this
 too must end:  there were only so many days one could call in sick;
 plus, she knew that her boss at the record store was beginning to
 suspect that her labored breathing when she called in to say that she
 was sick had less to do with the ravages of the flu than she had been
 willing to admit."
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Die Fledermaus)
Subject: AnotherCatHousePosting
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 00:52:26 GMT

(Iron Tiger)????writes:
>Steady-on John writes:
>>A SleazyHussy writes:
>>>It's yummy and easy to spread when heated.
>>
>>Sounds like one of them cheap, sleazy, hussies.
>
>Only if you scratch just above my ass and make my
>tail go up.

Only a SleazyHussy would say StuffLikeDat!
HowCheap for a half&half, BaaaaaaaybeH???

dreas

Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.sex,talk.religion.misc
From: mayne@pipe.cs.fsu.edu (William Mayne)
Subject: Re: You heard it here First
Reply-To: mayne@cs.fsu.edu
Organization: Florida State University Computer Science Department
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 16:42:35 GMT

In article <14094@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>
>Not so funny.  Olivia Newton-John has that name because she's
>a descendant of Issac Newton.  Clear evidence of deevolution
>in action.

Clear evidence that Clayton E. Cramer knows not where of he writes.
Isaac Newton had no descendents.

Bill Mayne
From: weaver@jetsun.weitek.COM (Michael Gordon Weaver)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: *How* did you meet your SO (And do they know?)
Date: 21 Jan 93 21:32:09 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1993Jan20.001919.7388@julian.uwo.ca> jdnicoll@prism.ccs.uwo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes:
>
>	How many folks' accounts of how they met up  with their
>SO differ markedly from their SO's account? While Jaz and I
>disagree on minor details (Exactly what I said after my vampire
>comment and whether or not there  is such a thing as an innocent
>four hour foot rub), I know at least  one couple whose versions
>differ as to the day they met, how they came to get involved,
>and so  on. Is communication in a relationship as important as
>the appearance of communication?
>
>						James Nicoll
>
I have learned not to ask a couple questions about their early
relationship when they are together, because always seem to
have such different views of it, and often feel they should
remember it all the same way. One partner remembers seeing the
other long before the other noticed the first. On partner 
remembers dating as if it were a military campaign, the other
seems to think things just fell into place. And on and on.

But in the early stages of a relationship, communications are
not very good. And I don't think it is really important or 
profitable to try to come to a common understanding after 
the fact. Probably better that both can keep their fond
memories of how things got started, even if they don't
agree.

Peace,
Michael.
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.penpals,alt.romance,alt.romance.chat
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Subject: Re: SM ISO MAIL
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:08:04 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.163639.29694@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> fes9s@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Howard Johnson's Got His Ho-Jo Workin') writes:
>In article <C19GCo.DE7@cen.ex.ac.uk> st92rcn@cen.ex.ac.uk writes:
>                                ^^^^
>>My name is rachel and I want your body
>
>RACHEL! How many times do we have to tell you the net is international
>and the UK is a long way off from nearly everybody??? Tease.

Oh yeah.  Especially from people in the UK.

(Try soc.bi -- there are so many UK people coming out of the woodwork
on that group that the Americans will soon be feeling like an
oppressed minority...)

--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Credibility...
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 07:05:32 GMT

In article <ewright.727854345@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>In <MARTINC.93Jan23124248@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>
>>Being "single" I presume implies "not in a monogamous relationship" 
>
>Can't count very well, can you Charlie?
>
>Single means "one."
>
>Not single means "more than one."

I can understand Charlie's confusion on this matter--after all, it's a
matter that seems to have confused the authors and editors of the various
English dictionaries I have around here.  For example, in Webster's Ninth
New Collegiate Dictionary, it says, "sin-gle  1a:  not married."

According to the dictionary and according to common usage, "single" doesn't
necessarilly imply "not in a monogamous relationship"--Charlie was just
trying to establish exactly what you meant by the term in the context you
used it in.

Trygve   (Does this mean that the readers of soc.couples are $5 or more?)
--
"Heartbreak Between Floors by Hillary Jemcoate.  True story of romance,
 love, and betrayal in a stuck elevator.  120pp."
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Favorite Groups
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 05:22:57 GMT

In article <thurlow.728191661@convex.convex.com> thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes:
 
] In <1993Jan24.234120.21420@netcom.com>
]     rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer) writes:
]
] >     Guy Barry asked and I answered him with who I liked.  Computer
] >generated? Nah.
]
] You mean you enter "Browne, Jackson" BY HAND?  Do you do that when
] speaking, too?  You must have a hard time talking to anyone except
] toll-free salespeople.
 
[most of tirade deleted; if you care, you can read it in any of the
 several messages Rob has been posting each day that all say the same
 thing, with each only a little more strident than the previous one]
 
] As such,
] you make my skin crawl, where before I simply though of you as having
] no redeeming characteristics.  Get thee to a mental health facility!
 
I know someone who, back in his early to mid teens, used to have
tantrums like this when someone did something he thought was improper,
like wearing a shirt that didn't have all it's buttons buttoned--he
figured that if a shirt had buttons, then they were meant to be buttoned
and would become quite vocally angry at anyone who failed to use buttons
in the manner he felt they should be.  Granted, leaving a collar button
undone is a bit more serious (and at least as peculiar) as typing
"Browne, Jackson," but there were other things at least as trivial as
your particular hangup that he couldn't deal with rationally either.
 
Fortunately, he grew out of it not too long after becoming old enough to
drive--now, I'd gotten the impression from your other posts that you
were perhaps a little older than that (do correct me if I'm wrong here),
but perhaps you're just a late bloomer and just need a little more time.
 
Ah, well; if nothing else, the recent onslaught of your anti-David
messages has given him a good chance to impress me with his ability to
remain intellectually competent and rational no matter how much you
stomp your little feet and throw ASCII tantrums at him for typing in
a few names in alphabetical order or having well-expressed and
considered ideas on controversial subjects.
 
Trygve
--
"There exists considerable anecdotal evidence for helpful dolphins carrying
 injured swimmers back to shore; however, it seems unlikely that injured
 swimmers who were carried out to sea by equally well-intentioned but
 somewhat more misguided dolphins would have much to say about it."

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: Credibility...
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 14:38:23 GMT

In article <MARTINC.93Jan23123842@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>In article <ewright.727734935@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>
>   In <MARTINC.93Jan21101124@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>
>   >But he can't -- that would mean he had to admit that it is *possible* to
>   >be happy being single.  As with the working out thread, that would mean
>   >giving up the idea that something about himself may be why he's unhappy.
>
>   Whoo!  It's Psycho V -- The Return of Charlie Martin.
>
>   Run along now, Charles.  Mother's calling.
>
>Ed, a long time ago I figured out there were certain people and certain
>remarks for which the only intellectually honest response was "oh, fuck
>you." 

 
================================================================================
 Steatopygias's 'R' Us.          doh#0000000005 That ain't no Hottentot.
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. AMA#669373 DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Xref: sparky soc.singles:37736 alt.sex:43037
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.sex
Subject: Re: FeMale TransVestitieISM
Date: 24 Jan 93 10:41:43
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
NNTP-Posting-Host: grover.cs.unc.edu
In-reply-to: drieux@wetware.com's message of 24 Jan 93 07:21:27 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.072127.1170@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:

   Just Because SOME FEMALES get a Sexual Thrill out
   of Dressing up Like James Dean! Does NOT mean that
   they are Sexually NORMAL!!!!!

It doesn't?
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T