Good Places to Meet People?
Loren I. Petrich
I hope that this is an OK subject in this newsgroup :-)
I'm asking that because I've been out of luck, and I hope that
some other of you people can help me out on that.
I'm looking for some good places to meet single women between
their 20's and their 40's (I'm an early-30's single male). I have some
constraints. I _despise_ football, and I'm indifferent to most other
sports; I am a strict teetotaler and nonsmoker (CH3CH2OH-consumers
are acceptable if they don't bug me about my teetotaling; smokers are
not).
I like to bicycle and I like going to interesting places. I
_love_ computers, especially Macintoshes. They're very good for
writing, artwork, and playing games on. My main TV-watching, outside
of the news, is Star Trek and Babylon 5. I like listening to
techno/disco-ish music, and I hope to make such music myself. I
confess I'd prefer an academic-type setting, such as near Berkeley,
because that's where I might find people most like me.
I don't want anything connected to religion, though I could
compromise on Unitarianism :-) Or maybe _some_ New-Age sort of stuff.
Transportation constraints? I am automotively challenged (a
"Politically Correct" term I invented for carlessness), so I am
limited to places not too far from a BART or Muni Metro station.
Berkeley would certainly be a good place (college towns are
probably my favorite type of environment), but I'm willing to consider
some San Francisco place also. Any good places elsewhere in the East
Bay? In the Walnut Creek -- Concord area? The Dublin -- Pleasanton
area? Livermore itself???
I won't be too eager about somewhere near Stanford until the
Muni Metro connection to CalTrain gets going next year; I can hang out
in or near Justin Herman Plaza and take the MM trolley to the next
CalTrain. And of course, I would take the MM from CalTrain to BART.
But I now have to either walk through some run-down area or wait for a
bus (well, it's a trolleybus) in some awkward spot to get there.
And I don't figure getting too excited about San Jose, for
that matter -- 45 minutes by bus from Fremont, though SJ does have a
nice trolley line.
As should be evident, I enjoy riding trains. I eagerly await
the extension of BART to the D/P area; that will cut out a lot of bus
distance I have to ride (I live in Livermore).
And last, but not least, I like Madonna.
Maybe there could be a FAQ file on the subject of good places
--
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/l...@s1.gov
/ Happiness is a fast Macintosh
/ And a fast train
Richard Bennett
>From: l...@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
>Subject: Good Places to Meet People?
>Date: 27 Jun 1994 06:07:22 GMT
> I'm looking for some good places to meet single women between
>their 20's and their 40's (I'm an early-30's single male). I have some
>constraints.
A few tips/pointers:
1. Asya might be interested if you'd get a bit more vivid about your
"constraints." I can't attest to this from personal experience, but my spies
say she's "that kinda girl."
2. Older women are easier to please.
3. Check out the "Gala Singles Event / Private Club" posting. I think you'll
find it s(t)imulating.
4. Collect some jokes, stories, or a social conscience. All seem to go over
well here, as does a fondness for the law, bicycling, latex, and cattle.
5. Don't be so f*cking obvious. They want you to act like you just like to
socialize, not like you're horny as a toad. I don't quite understand the
rationale for this, I guess it has something to do with the general American
fear of pleasure, but pays to be cool. Go see a coupla James Dean movies and
cop an attitude.
6. Most of the "sensitive male" positions are already taken by guys named
Bob. Still a few openings for over-educated macho studs, however.
Welcome aboard.
RB
--
"Casey Jones, you better watch your speed..." Dead
Bob Becker - The World's Leading Authority
>
>6. Most of the "sensitive male" positions are already taken by guys named
>Bob. Still a few openings for over-educated macho studs, however.
Hey! They are not. All the new-age, sensitive guys are name Dave.
Bobs like to stack their chicks like cordwood in the back seat
of the car, take them out for burgers and beer, have our way with
them, drive to a remote location, belch, laugh, kick them out,
and then go back for more.
>
Steve
>
>
> I hope that this is an OK subject in this newsgroup :-)
>
> I'm asking that because I've been out of luck, and I hope that
> some other of you people can help me out on that.
>
> I'm looking for some good places to meet single women between
> their 20's and their 40's (I'm an early-30's single male). I have some
> constraints. I _despise_ football, and I'm indifferent to most other
> sports; I am a strict teetotaler and nonsmoker
> --
> /Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
Try rec.bingo
Steve-
Gary Allman
>
>2. Older women are easier to please.
>
This does not necessarily apply to an individual woman. e.g, my ex-wife was
more difficult to please as she got older.
Asya
> I hope that this is an OK subject in this newsgroup :-)
48 lines of a cleveerly disguised personal ad deleted.
> Maybe there could be a FAQ file on the subject of good places
I have a FAA for that one: post in alt.personals and ask the women
who respond where they hang out.
Though now that I think abbout it... I think I have a friend who might
bbe just the woman you're looking for... email me for details...
--
Asya Kamsky I need another drink
Santa Cruz, CA to blow on the glass so I know I'm alive
Karl....@syntex.com
> I'm looking for some good places to meet single women between
> their 20's and their 40's (I'm an early-30's single male).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I have a strange hobby: I like to read the personal ads. One thing I notice is
that people will state "mid-thirties" or "early forties", etc.
My question: Why not just say "I'm 35" or "I'm 42" and be done with it? What is
the advantage of saying something vague like "mid-thirties", etc.?
Dave Berg
Bob Becker - The World's Leading Authority <b...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <Richard.3...@Bennett.com> Ric...@Bennett.com (Richard Bennett) writes:
>>
>>6. Most of the "sensitive male" positions are already taken by guys named
>>Bob. Still a few openings for over-educated macho studs, however.
>
>Hey! They are not. All the new-age, sensitive guys are name Dave.
He's right, ya know.
>
>Bobs like to stack their chicks like cordwood in the back seat
>of the car, take them out for burgers and beer, have our way with
>them, drive to a remote location, belch, laugh, kick them out,
>and then go back for more.
Damn. Wonder if I can change my name to Bob...
No parking EXCEPT FOR BOB
Hey!
Now you've done it.
Now, even _Daves_ can use that one!
Give away any more Bob secrets and you'll regret it...
Bob O`Bob
--
Bob Becker - The World's Leading Authority
>Bob Becker - The World's Leading Authority <b...@netcom.com> wrote:
>'now serving number 253' sign behind Chilis on Friday. Way to party
>But, if the burgers and beers were for *everyone* and you were buying,
Me buy????? hahahahahahahahaa No, no... I don't want the chicks
to feel pressured so I let them buy the food before we do the
nasty. I'm a sensitive 90's kinda guy, ya know?
Ken Wallich
So that was *you* with the maul and chipper, and that cool electronic
'now serving number 253' sign behind Chilis on Friday. Way to party
Bob!
But, if the burgers and beers were for *everyone* and you were buying,
then I think you still qualify for the Mr. Toxic sensitive date
reciprecation award.
--
Ken Wallich - k...@wallich.com | k...@al.org
"It's a shame that whole families are torn apart by something as simple as
wild dogs."
Ciccio
> I hope that this is an OK subject in this newsgroup :-)
I dunno. Did you observe before you posted?
>Bay? In the Walnut Creek -- Concord area? The Dublin -- Pleasanton
>area? Livermore itself???
Talk about not observing! Hello! Anybody Home? Hmmmm let's think really
hard, now, where can you find a babe, in Livermore, who wears a propeller hat
like you do? Come on, atta boy...strain that brain....you can do it. OK,
I'll give you a hint...look at your Header [that's the area on the top part
of your post].
You Idiot! Just look outside. Believe me, I dated a few, you would get along
just fine. Hmmmm. Something is going on here. I can't believe you overlooked
the obvious.
Maybe you don't want to date somebody who also works at LLNL. OK, so ask
about some of their friends. You know, birds [yep, even cuckoos] flock together.
Or maybe, you do have your eye on somebody at LLNL...You sly rascal, you.
I get it. You post on here, and then she sees it and says: "Oh my, look, Loren
is lonely." Then she puts on her best pocket protector and then bumps into
you <wink> <wink>.
OK, I guess because this *personal* ad of yours was really just a romantic
ruse, I'm not gonna flame you. But now that the truth is out, I bet there's a
whole lot of disappointed lurking women who were yearning to take that
bus ride to paradise with you.
Ciao!
Ciccio
Dave Berg
>
>
>> I'm looking for some good places to meet single women between
>> their 20's and their 40's (I'm an early-30's single male).
>I have a strange hobby: I like to read the personal ads. One thing I notice is
>that people will state "mid-thirties" or "early forties", etc.
>
>My question: Why not just say "I'm 35" or "I'm 42" and be done with it? What is
>the advantage of saying something vague like "mid-thirties", etc.?
Dunno, but what are those funny ^M things at the ends of some of the lines
in your post?
John Fereira
>l...@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>
>
>> I hope that this is an OK subject in this newsgroup :-)
>
>I dunno. Did you observe before you posted?
>
>>Bay? In the Walnut Creek -- Concord area? The Dublin -- Pleasanton
>>area? Livermore itself???
>
>Talk about not observing! Hello! Anybody Home? Hmmmm let's think really
>hard, now, where can you find a babe, in Livermore, who wears a propeller hat
>like you do?
Well, it's not going to be in places like "The Rodeo", or "Palimoni's", or
"Buckhorn", or even the "Livermore Saloon". They were a different kind
of hat in those places.
In Pleasanton, try "Sunshine Saloon". It's a real young crowd but it
can really gets hopping. I can often be found throwing darts at "Popi
Lounge" . They get a good mixed crowd and have live music Thursdays
through Saturdays.
In Danville, try Jimmy's. It also has mostly a young crowd but I've
had a good time there as well.
John
Ciccio
>In Pleasanton, try "Sunshine Saloon". It's a real young crowd but it
>can really gets hopping. I can often be found throwing darts at "Popi
>Lounge" . They get a good mixed crowd and have live music Thursdays
>through Saturdays.
Oh yea, he likes women who don't drink or smoke. I'm sure he'll find lots
of them in those places... Geez, maybe he should try the Union Jack Pub
too :-)
Ciao!
Ciccio
Ciccio
>48 lines of a cleveerly disguised personal ad deleted.
>> Maybe there could be a FAQ file on the subject of good places
>I have a FAA for that one: post in alt.personals and ask the women
>who respond where they hang out.
>Though now that I think abbout it... I think I have a friend who might
>bbe just the woman you're looking for... email me for details...
5 lines of cleverly disguised "I wanna meet you". :-)
Ciao!
Ciccio
Ron Drake
>
> I'm asking that because I've been out of luck, and I hope that
> some other of you people can help me out on that.
Well, Loren...your post violates the law against personal ads,
but you didn't put in any specific requirements about what kind
of car the woman you're seeking should drive or how well-endowed
she should be in the chestal area, so I'll assume you're "A Nice
Guy"ª and give you the dubious benefit of my advice.
Find a place near you. A place easy for you to get to. A place
with plenty of room. Maybe a nice outdoor patio. Alcoholic bev-
erages aren't a must but you may want a beer after meeting some
of the people you're going to meet. Up to you. Pick a night.
Post an announcement saying that you're going to be in the ap-
pointed place at the appointed time. Show up with a good book
or other diversion in case no one shows. Put up a sign that
reads BOINK. Wait for the fun to start. Repeat.
Now, I grant you that you may either find yourself alone or
surrounded by the biggest collection of geeks this side of
Mt. Diablo. But geeks have friends.
The operative word in all this is "fun." Getting together
with a bunch of people and honestly having a good time is
the most attractive thing you can do.
Of course, your mileage may vary...
John Fereira
smoking establishment. A monthly newsletter called the "Nooner" called it
a yuppie frat party atmosphere. If he doesn't like it he can always come
down a few doors to Popi lounge where I just took a couple of people for
decent cash playing darts.
John
Hugh Bonney
: I hope that this is an OK subject in this newsgroup :-)
: I'm asking that because I've been out of luck, and I hope that
: some other of you people can help me out on that.
Two jobs ago I began to wonder why most people I saw around me
were stuck in a perpetually adolescent personal life and so on.
So I quietly took a poll in the large department where I worked.
The divorce rate among Caucasian and African Americans was about
70%. No such woman under 40 had more than one child, probably because
it would be foolish under such unstable circumstances. The last
place I worked was almost that bad. There were never any single
people over 30 who were not Caucasian or African American
anywhere which is why I mention such categories at all.
Most people in the area with somewhat stable family lives are
immigrants, although that stability is often at the expense of
the wives. Another problem is that meeting people here means
meeting people whose history is invisible and the odds are not
very good, unfortunately. Some ways out of these difficulties
don't work very well, I notice. You really can't blame yourself
or being "out of luck" after a point. After all, why should you
feel that you can beat the statistics? Why should who you are
make any difference when it doesn't seem to for most others?
If you want your 'luck' to improve, the best scheme is to leave
the area entirely. And I don't mean go to Los Angeles :-) .
Hugh ----------------------
Cregg Lund
>
> Two jobs ago I began to wonder why most people I saw around me
> were stuck in a perpetually adolescent personal life and so on.
Yup. We're the lucky ones.
> If you want your 'luck' to improve, the best scheme is to leave
> the area entirely. And I don't mean go to Los Angeles :-) .
Having trouble getting laid Hugh?
Lobster King
Richard Bennett
: >
OK Bob, while I could challenge this on "authenticity" since it makes no
mention of scratching and farting, I'll amend the ba.singles job
descriptions:
"The "sensitive male" positions are taken by guys named Dave, and there
was only one to start with.
"BOBs" occupy a loftier plane in the ba.singles spectrum, as studs
in training who amuse themselves with Viking fantasies, which are all
fine and shit, as long as none of MY DAUGHTERS are involved.
"Finally, the ultimate aspiration of any ba.singles male is to
successfully pass himself off as an over-educated macho stud desired by
all the most desirable women, but rationing out his favors judiciously so
as not the ruin the babes completely for the lesser males who will
doubtless become their love-slaves when the OEMSs are done with them."
_Guide to Bay Area Dating in the Late 20th Century_,
Purina
--
Ric...@Bennett.com 408/446-4725
Network Strategies Cupertino, CA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"The first law of education should be this: 'Feed only the hungry.'"
- Fred
Ayse Sercan
>Bobs like to stack their chicks like cordwood in the back seat
>of the car, take them out for burgers and beer, have our way with
>them, drive to a remote location, belch, laugh, kick them out,
>and then go back for more.
You actually take them out for burgers and beer?
--
Ayse Sercan ay...@netcom.com
"Every purchase is a victory."
Bob Becker - The World's Leading Authority
>>Bobs like to stack their chicks like cordwood in the back seat
>>of the car, take them out for burgers and beer, have our way with
>>them, drive to a remote location, belch, laugh, kick them out,
Yes, but they have to buy.
Hugh Bonney
: In article hbo...@netcom.com (Hugh Bonney) wrote:
: > Loren I. Petrich (l...@s1.gov) wrote:
: > : I hope that this is an OK subject in this newsgroup :-)
: > : I'm asking that because I've been out of luck, and I hope that
: > : some other of you people can help me out on that.
: > : (an ad, more or less..)
: > The divorce rate among Caucasian and African Americans was about (70%)
: ...
: > (no single) people over 30 who were not Caucasian or African American
: > anywhere which is why I mention such categories at all.
: folks, not to mention that despite your caveat, race has nothing to do with
: what you're talking about.
Indeed, race is irrelevant; culture is what I'm getting at. The 'folks
left out' are almost never single over about age 30 was the point. I
wasn't leaving them out at all :-) .
: > Most people in the area with somewhat stable family lives are
: > immigrants, although that stability is often at the expense of
: ...
: Oh, so if you're not Caucasian or African American, then you're immigrant?
: Sounds like pretty faulty logic there, Hugh.
Sorry if I have been misunderstood. In Silicon Valley the majority
of, say, people of Asian descent are immigrants by far. I'm entirely
aware that there are, say, people in California whose ancestors were
from China many generations ago. To the degree that a family has
assimilated, they usually share the usual disintegration. I don't feel
the need to be PC in all directions to make this point as it's a
commonplace observation. Local educators often observe in interviews
that after a couple of generations in California the public school
students tend to converge to the same lower level of performance.
Most areas in the US have the same effect.
: > If you want your 'luck' to improve, the best scheme is to leave
: > the area entirely. And I don't mean go to Los Angeles :-) .
: Hmmm. Well, what are you doing here, then?
Professionally, Silicon Valley is still one of the best places to be.
The breadth and depth of the job market in computing is unmatched
anywhere. It's in a very nice setting and you don't have to do 100
yards in 10 seconds to survive. In fact, most people are quite pleasant
in everyday behavior here and it's fun meeting smart people from nearly
everywhere. I like the openness to the future; the orientation across
the Pacific and traveling there; I like a lot of things about it. But
it clearly has its price. I'm not saying that there is some simple
paradise just over yonder, pack your car...
: Here's the deal. I've known lots of people who have blown out of this area
: because there "aren't enough women." They think if they move somewhere
: else, women will fall at their feet. So now the guys in Denver or somesuch
: place and next thing you know, they're saying "jeeze how do you meet women
: here?" Hmmm.
Is this from another thread?
: I don't think it matters where you live. It matters what kind of person you
: are.
: Go out. Do stuff. Be yourself. The right person will (someday) show up, and
It surely matters what sort of person you are *and* what environment
you're in. The best Olympic swimmer can't swim up a waterfall. Certainly
"Go out. Do stuff. Be yourself.", it's a more interesting life and it's
not unheard-of to meet people. But we can't let too many years go by,
though, without notice. If our values don't work, then which ones do?
: if you don't get real stupid, you'll realize it and hang on for the ride.
Is the rodeo imagery here accidental :-) ??
Hugh ------
Dave Berg
Dave Berg
Hugh Bonney <hbo...@netcom.com> wrote:
> Some time ago I followed a family through the Carlsbad Caverns
> tour. The parents and the three kids each wore a tee shirt that
> said "How can we lose when we're so sincere?". What do you think?
Keep up with the Joneses. Learn to lie like a rogue.
Raymond E. Rogers
your own BBS! He did and he has :-)
Ray
Cregg Lund
> statistics;
Bah. I think I'm doing better. I know others who are doing better.
> a relationship requires more than one person, remember?
Of course I remember. I happen to know it takes three people and
at least two of them have to be female.
> Some time ago I followed a family through the Carlsbad Caverns
> tour.
You pervert.
> The parents and the three kids each wore a tee shirt that
> said "How can we lose when we're so sincere?". What do you think?
I think Dad was a cheapscape who went for the "5 tees for $15" special
and took whatever was left.
Lobster King
Bob R. Kenyon
wrote:
> Bob R. Kenyon (r...@rahul.net) wrote:
> : In article hbo...@netcom.com (Hugh Bonney) wrote:
>
> Sorry if I have been misunderstood. In Silicon Valley the majority
> of, say, people of Asian descent are immigrants by far. I'm entirely
> aware that there are, say, people in California whose ancestors were
> from China many generations ago. To the degree that a family has
> assimilated, they usually share the usual disintegration. I don't feel
> the need to be PC in all directions to make this point as it's a
> commonplace observation. Local educators often observe in interviews
> that after a couple of generations in California the public school
> students tend to converge to the same lower level of performance.
> Most areas in the US have the same effect.
So we're not talking about race at all. We're talking about the failure of
parents to do something besides watch TV while their kids are growing up.
This I agree on.
I'm not quibbling about your lack of PCness. I don't care about PC either.
I care more about the fact that sweeping generalizations don't tell you
anything but what the average is. Say, "All the people *I* know have crappy
family lives." You see, I can find families that have been in this country
for over 300 years (mine) and, while they may not be "perfect" in some
ideal, Ozzie and Harriet way, are at least producing productive members of
society. You can also find families of criminals in those boats of people
coming over from China.
There. I've proved you wrong, twice. I even went to public school!
> : Hmmm. Well, what are you doing here, then?
>
> Professionally, Silicon Valley is still one of the best places to be.
> The breadth and depth of the job market in computing is unmatched
> anywhere. It's in a very nice setting and you don't have to do 100
> yards in 10 seconds to survive. In fact, most people are quite pleasant
> in everyday behavior here and it's fun meeting smart people from nearly
> everywhere. I like the openness to the future; the orientation across
> the Pacific and traveling there; I like a lot of things about it. But
> it clearly has its price. I'm not saying that there is some simple
> paradise just over yonder, pack your car...
You're right there. That's why I'm staying. Just think. There's probably
bright professional smart people around here you could meet, and maybe
date!
> : Here's the deal. I've known lots of people who have blown out of this area
> : because there "aren't enough women." They think if they move somewhere
> : else, women will fall at their feet. So now the guys in Denver or somesuch
> : place and next thing you know, they're saying "jeeze how do you meet women
> : here?" Hmmm.
>
> Is this from another thread?
Nah, real life.
> : I don't think it matters where you live. It matters what kind of person you
> : are.
> : Go out. Do stuff. Be yourself. The right person will (someday) show up, and
>
> It surely matters what sort of person you are *and* what environment
> you're in. The best Olympic swimmer can't swim up a waterfall. Certainly
> "Go out. Do stuff. Be yourself.", it's a more interesting life and it's
> not unheard-of to meet people. But we can't let too many years go by,
> though, without notice. If our values don't work, then which ones do?
Hey, I didn't say it was easy! But you can't tell me that there aren't
hundreds or thousands of people out there, doing things you like to do, and
wondering if they, too, will someday meet someone...just like you! The
problem begins when you stay inside your house, thinking about how you're
never going to meet anyone. That's when you get depressed and think you
should leave. Then you're just setting yourself up for failure.
If you like jazz, go to a jazz festival. If you like to drink, go to a bar.
If you bike, do organized bike rides. If you have friends, they have
friends, and their friends have friends. We're in a huge community here,
and sooner or later, you'll run into someone. Sounds lame, but it really is
the best way.
> : if you don't get real stupid, you'll realize it and hang on for the ride.
>
> Is the rodeo imagery here accidental :-) ??
Yeah, I guess it was.
Bob
--
Bob Kenyon, Mac Fanatic | "It's incredible, it's historical,
Beautiful Downtown San Jose, CA | it's very cool."
r...@rahul.net | --Alexi Lalas, US Soccer Team
| on beating Colombia 2-1
Hugh Bonney
: I care more about the fact that sweeping generalizations don't tell you
: anything but what the average is. Say, "All the people *I* know have crappy
: family lives." You see, I can find families that have been in this country
: for over 300 years (mine) and, while they may not be "perfect" in some
: ideal, Ozzie and Harriet way, are at least producing productive members of
: society. You can also find families of criminals in those boats of people
: coming over from China.
: There. I've proved you wrong, twice. I even went to public school!
If I were that simple-minded, I couldn't have found the computer
power switch today. Indeed, most everywhere are found saints and
crooks. That won't exactly make the evening news. The family my
name came from has been in Massachusetts for about 285 years. So
what? The P.R.China is beginning a process that will likely lead
to more social disintegration than the US has ever had, and their
system of government is far less adapted to chaos than that of the
US. And there are interesting variants on concepts like "conflict
of interest" there. So?
All I said was that the odds for certain people in the Valley are
especially bad. Further, why meet someone who is just part of the
problem too? That is hardly an excuse to do nothing. It's a reason
to start thinking.
: ..... That's why I'm staying. Just think. There's probably
: bright professional smart people around here you could meet, and maybe
: date!
Of course; so?
: Hey, I didn't say it was easy! But you can't tell me that there aren't
: hundreds or thousands of people out there, doing things you like to do, and
: wondering if they, too, will someday meet someone...just like you! The
: problem begins when you stay inside your house, thinking about how you're
: never going to meet anyone. That's when you get depressed and think you
: should leave. Then you're just setting yourself up for failure.
Of course; so?
: If you like jazz, go to a jazz festival. If you like to drink, go to a bar.
: If you bike, do organized bike rides. If you have friends, they have
: friends, and their friends have friends. We're in a huge community here,
: and sooner or later, you'll run into someone. Sounds lame, but it really is
: the best way.
Of course, up till you say "community". That we haven't got much of,
and that's probably part of the problem.
Hugh
Asya
> especially bad. Further, why meet someone who is just part of the
> problem too? That is hardly an excuse to do nothing. It's a reason
> to start thinking.
You haven't proved it. I, for one, don't believe that there is a group
of people for whom it's especially bad, unless you define the group as
"People who think they'll never meet anyone" -- self-fullfilling prophecies
are wonderous things.
>: friends, and their friends have friends. We're in a huge community here,
>: and sooner or later, you'll run into someone. Sounds lame, but it really is
>: the best way.
> Of course, up till you say "community". That we haven't got much of,
> and that's probably part of the problem.
You have the community that you choose. If you've chosen to be part
of no community, that's no one else's fault. I have found several
communities in the Bay Area that I have been happy to draw friends
from.
"Put your big toe in the milk of human kindness
have you ever seen the like of this mankind?"
--
Asya Kamsky Safe from fears, safe from harm
Santa Cruz, CA
Hugh Bonney
: In article <hbonneyC...@netcom.com>,
: Hugh Bonney <hbo...@netcom.com> wrote:
: > All I said was that the odds for certain people in the Valley are
: > especially bad. Further, why meet someone who is just part of the
: > problem too? That is hardly an excuse to do nothing. It's a reason
: > to start thinking.
: You haven't proved it. I, for one, don't believe that there is a group
: of people for whom it's especially bad, unless you define the group as
: are wondrous things.
I mentioned going through a couple of large departments at two
employers and finding a ~70% divorce rate and no women under 40
with more than one child. I hope this is exceptionally bad even
for Silicon Valley, but it certainly is food for thought. I also
notice that these same people are most often bringing up kiddies
who spend more time on emotional problems than homework problems.
Luckily California still attracts people from around the world.
Meeting people isn't the problem. I realize that not being relent-
lessly positive is somehow un-California, but I'm not advocating
doing nothing. I just can't see acting like a fly trying to get out
a slightly opened window by flying again and again and again against
the glass...
: >: friends, and their friends have friends. We're in a huge community here,
: >: and sooner or later, you'll run into someone. Sounds lame, but it really is
: >: the best way.
You're right - that's why we get auto insurance..
: > Of course, up till you say "community". That we haven't got much of,
: > and that's probably part of the problem.
: You have the community that you choose. If you've chosen to be part
: of no community, that's no one else's fault. I have found several
: communities in the Bay Area that I have been happy to draw friends from.
Community is a reciprocal relation. It's not easy to be a member of
several except in a small way. Community usually means some shared
values, exchange of services, participation and contribution to, say,
schools or other organized activities, some feeling of identifying with
the group, and so on.
: Asya Kamsky Safe from fears, safe from harm
It's not intended here to make anyone feel unsafe.
Asya
Hugh Bonney <hbo...@netcom.com> wrote:
> I mentioned going through a couple of large departments at two
> employers and finding a ~70% divorce rate and no women under 40
> with more than one child. I hope this is exceptionally bad even
> for Silicon Valley, but it certainly is food for thought. I also
Maybe we just have different views on what that proves. To me that
proves absolutely nothing. I certainly under no circumstances will
buy "more kids == happier life" being an only child and knowing
many couples who chose to have one offspring.
Divorce rates are also somewhat non-indicative of anything more than
the fact that people change and it's acceptable these days to change
your life drastically to go with those changes.
> notice that these same people are most often bringing up kiddies
> who spend more time on emotional problems than homework problems.
The previous generation had more emotional problems than homework
problems also, but they weren't suppsed to spend time on them. I
don't think that's a good thing.
> Community is a reciprocal relation. It's not easy to be a member of
> several except in a small way.
Well, that may be true for you, but it's not true for many of us.
Maybe what you have to offer this community that doesn't recipocate
itsn't appropriate, and you need to find another community?
> Community usually means some shared
> values, exchange of services, participation and contribution to, say,
> schools or other organized activities, some feeling of identifying with
> the group, and so on.
Yeah, so, what's your point? I have found many communities that
satisfy those points... they are here, and the hazing rituals to get
into them for the most part aren't that bad.
"when everybody loves you
you can never be lonely..."
--
Asya Kamsky Safe from fears, safe from harm
Santa Cruz, CA
Hugh Bonney
: Maybe we just have different views on what that proves. To me that
: proves absolutely nothing. I certainly under no circumstances will
: buy "more kids == happier life" being an only child and knowing
: many couples who chose to have one offspring.
can't manage to achieve the replacement rate in births overall,
evolution will do its usual work. Each person will have to decide
if that means anything or not to them when made personal. Surely
there are very happy one-kid families around here. I even hope they
stay that way more than 6 months.
: Divorce rates are also somewhat non-indicative of anything more than
: the fact that people change and it's acceptable these days to change
: your life drastically to go with those changes.
People make changes (though character is pretty constant), but
when they make so many so fast so often it's usually a sign of
something wrong. Like being egoistic, unstable, etc., etc. The
high divorce rate also seriously affects cultural transmission
between generations, too, as well as making shrinks rich. If UCB
admissions were strictly based on apparent academic qualifications
(as they should be), the group we're talking about would hardly be
there at all.
: The previous generation had more emotional problems than homework
: problems also, but they weren't suppsed to spend time on them. I
: don't think that's a good thing.
I think the rate has gotten worse, but you may be right. I'm just
complaining that if people can't make a living, emotional problems
will seem a luxury to them. The world can be extremely harsh,
especially to people with no extended family structure to fall back
on, little education, no skills, and middle-class expectations.
: > Community is a reciprocal relation. It's not easy to be a member of
: > several except in a small way. (H.B.)
: Well, that may be true for you, but it's not true for many of us.
OK, you may be talented or something - being a real member of several
communities takes a commitment of time I haven't got. I'm glad to
know some people feel they can do it.
: "when everybody loves you, you can never be lonely..."
If a person thought that *everybody* loved them, salespersons for
penny stocks and Florida swampland would ring the phone off the
person's wall :-) . How about somebody, or some happy few? Would
someone say that everyone loved them without meaning that no one
in particular did? (Sorry if I don't understand this.)
Hugh ---------
Gary Allman
> Who said more kids = happier life? I'm saying that if a culture
> can't manage to achieve the replacement rate in births overall,
> evolution will do its usual work.
There is nothing more selfish than having children. It is something done only
because one choses to do so. Enjoyment, old-age security, ego trip of
replicating oneself, teaching, molding. A wonderful thing, but certainly not
a service to mankind.
If the population of the world dropped by 75%, markets would still be large
enough to drive competition and innovation, improving our 'standard of
living'. The world has way too many people. 'Achieving the replacement rate'
at the present population level is an obviously undesirable activity.
That mankind has more choice than other species will mean that some groups
will continue to breed at an excessive rate and thus will become more populous
than others. This doesn't provide sufficient cause for me to want to get into
a breeding contest.
--
Gary
gal...@netcom.com
408 926-0812
Asya
> admissions were strictly based on apparent academic qualifications
> (as they should be), the group we're talking about would hardly be
> there at all.
What the heck are you talking about here???
>: > Community is a reciprocal relation. It's not easy to be a member of
>: > several except in a small way. (H.B.)
>: Well, that may be true for you, but it's not true for many of us.
> OK, you may be talented or something - being a real member of several
> communities takes a commitment of time I haven't got. I'm glad to
> know some people feel they can do it.
Hugh -- you cannot (seemingly) complain about there being a lack of
community and then say *that*. Your credibility goes South when
you do that.
Do you feel that there should be a community out there that will
accept you without any work on your part? That will give to you
without your giving to them?
What abotu relationships? Will someone commit time and energy to
being in a relationship with you without your making the same commitment
in return?
>: "when everybody loves you, you can never be lonely..."
> If a person thought that *everybody* loved them, salespersons for
> penny stocks and Florida swampland would ring the phone off the
> person's wall :-) . How about somebody, or some happy few? Would
> someone say that everyone loved them without meaning that no one
> in particular did? (Sorry if I don't understand this.)
Do you know what "losing the quotes" means? I'll give you a simple
example: you are reading a book to a group of children, and one
character says to another "close the door" and suddenly one of the
kids gets up and closes the door.
"I'm always waiting for some love to arrive
I only want my fair share..."
Bob Becker - The World's Leading Authority
>than others. This doesn't provide sufficient cause for me to want to get into
>a breeding contest.
Well.... Let's not get too hasty here.
howeird
>That mankind has more choice than other species will mean that some groups
>will continue to breed at an excessive rate and thus will become more populous
>than others. This doesn't provide sufficient cause for me to want to get into
>a breeding contest.
Ironic, isn't it, that the folks who are too stupid to limit their breeding
are the ones whose descendents will overrun the earth? IMHO all intelligent
folk should have one child, just so the idiots don't completely take over
the planet.
-howeird
================================================================
| how...@netcom.COM |
| "I have the heart of a little child, and the brain of a genius |
| -- and I keep them in a jar under my bed" |
==================================================================
| Anatomically Correct Bulletin Board (415) 856-8425[Adults only] |
==================================================================
Dave Berg
>Ironic, isn't it, that the folks who are too stupid to limit their breeding
>folk should have one child, just so the idiots don't completely take over
>the planet.
[looking around] I think they already have.
Flash Sheridan
>: Divorce rates are also somewhat non-indicative of anything more than
>: the fact that people change and it's acceptable these days to change
>: your life drastically to go with those changes.
Three points. The important thing about the divorce rate is not what it
indicates, but what it causes. Second, divorce by definition does not
merely change your life, but others'. Third, you use "acceptable"
ambiguously; do you mean "right" or "popular"?
Flash Sheridan
Don't be silly; Three counterexamples: annexing the Sudetenland, conquering
Bosnia, and remaining President for Life.
> It is something done only
>because one choses to do so. Enjoyment, old-age security, ego trip of
>replicating oneself, teaching, molding. A wonderful thing, but certainly not
>a service to mankind.
>
Also obviously ill-thought-out. Accidental pregnancies still happen, and
some children grow up and render service to mankind.
Flash Sheridan
>are the ones whose descendents will overrun the earth?
Not necessarily. Insects tend to breed more than humans, but they
haven't yet completely overrun the place. I suspect Senator Moynihan's
nightmare scenario is starting, that we'll have a caste society, with the
descendants of those whose bred for quantity in the lower caste.
Ciccio
>There is nothing more selfish than having children. It is something done only
>because one choses to do so. Enjoyment, old-age security, ego trip of
>replicating oneself, teaching, molding. A wonderful thing, but certainly not
>a service to mankind.
You obviously don't know what it means to be a parent. It is a most
self-sacraficing act one can do. The sacrafices of time, money and lifestyle
generally for a period of decades is beyond imagination. Which it seems that
you can not even imagine it. Perhaps, your desire not to make such an enormous
sacrafice reflects your being selfish and you front off your selfishness behind
a bunch of BS. So, I submit the contrary view...there is nothing more selfish
than *not* having children. Though neither choice should be judged as wrong.
But let's tell like it is.
Ciao!
Ciccio
John Fereira
Flash Sheridan <FlaSh...@eWorld.com> wrote:
>In article <howeirdC...@netcom.com>, howeird <how...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>Ironic, isn't it, that the folks who are too stupid to limit their breeding
>>are the ones whose descendents will overrun the earth?
>
>Not necessarily. Insects tend to breed more than humans, but they
>haven't yet completely overrun the place.
1. Insects are much smaller and tend to congregate is a smaller region thus
are not noticed when they completely overrun a place. I've witnessed some
pretty large spinner falls and have camped in an area that was a breeding
ground for ladybugs. The do indeed overrun the place.
2. The lifespan of many insects is a few hours to a few days. Insects
die more than humans.
3. Insecticides.
As a flyfisherman/flytyer I've had the opportunity to study a bit about
emtomology. It is one of the more facinating aspects of the sport.
John
No parking EXCEPT FOR BOB
>Gary Allman <gal...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>There is nothing more selfish than having children.
>
>Don't be silly; Three counterexamples: annexing the Sudetenland, conquering
>Bosnia, and remaining President for Life.
Why, what a mean-spirited thing to say about Kennedy, Lincoln, Harrison,
and quite a few other Presidents!
Bob O`Bob
--
Asya
Flash Sheridan <FlaSh...@eWorld.com> wrote:
>>: Divorce rates are also somewhat non-indicative of anything more than
>>: the fact that people change and it's acceptable these days to change
>>: your life drastically to go with those changes.
>merely change your life, but others'. Third, you use "acceptable"
>ambiguously; do you mean "right" or "popular"?
Neither, I mean "acceptable". :)
Divorce is no longer stigmatized, and more people are going to do it
if it's right for them. Sometimes it's right. It definitely is
popular...
"But oh we're so contrary
from Father Chrismas to the Virgin Mary"
tim moore
as...@remarque.berkeley.edu (Asya) writes:
>Flash Sheridan <FlaSh...@eWorld.com> wrote:
>>>: Divorce rates are also somewhat non-indicative of anything more than
>>>: the fact that people change and it's acceptable these days to change
>>>: your life drastically to go with those changes.
..
>if it's right for them. Sometimes it's right. It definitely is
>popular...
Maybe it is related to an unwillingness to commit coupled with faster and
higher volumes of information.
In some cultures the 'norm' is to be matched with a mate by the
respective family elders and then stick with the match, so that options,
like divorce or same sex partners, are less common because in general
there are few alternative paradigms.
In our social-culture arena we get a historically unparalleled amount of
information and ideas (eg- publications, video, TV, networks, telephone,
virturally unrestricted travel) that it appears to be hard to make a
commitment to having something work in the face of constant listening
for something a little better to come along.
Does anyone how this would play out in modern European cultures?
--
Tim is distributed, but not owned by:
Digital Equipment / Palo Alto
Gary Allman
>gal...@netcom.com (Gary Allman) writes:
>
>>There is nothing more selfish than having children. It is something done only
>>because one choses to do so. Enjoyment, old-age security, ego trip of
>>replicating oneself, teaching, molding. A wonderful thing, but certainly not
>>a service to mankind.
>
>You obviously don't know what it means to be a parent. It is a most
>self-sacraficing act one can do. The sacrafices of time, money and lifestyle
>generally for a period of decades is beyond imagination. Which it seems that
>you can not even imagine it.
You obviously don't know what it means to be an aircraft owner. It is the most
self-sacrificing act one can do. The sacrifices of time, money and lifestyle,
generally for a period of decades, is beyond imagination.
8^)
Mr Toxic
(Flash Sheridan) writes:
>Not necessarily. Insects tend to breed more than humans, but they
>haven't yet completely overrun the place.
This isn't relevant. Mankind has removed itself from it's natural
link in the food chain. Our main predators are ourselves.
--
Wayne Greenwood
mrt...@aol.com
"Thank you for not breeding."
Richard Bennett
writes:
>As a flyfisherman/flytyer I've had the opportunity to study a bit about
>emtomology. It is one of the more facinating aspects of the sport.
lucky guy....
Mike Gainer
>In article <sheridanC...@netcom.com>, sher...@netcom.com
>(Flash Sheridan) writes:
>>Not necessarily. Insects tend to breed more than humans, but they
>>haven't yet completely overrun the place.
>This isn't relevant. Mankind has removed itself from it's natural
>link in the food chain. Our main predators are ourselves.
It ain't necessarily so that cannibalisim is not "natural". There's
some species of toad that lives in an area so [nutrient poor/screwed
up/I forget] that the only thing that'll grow is algae. Note that
tadpoles can survive on a diet of algae, but adults can't. Adults
*can* survive on a diet of tadpoles, however...
I hope you're not reading this during lunch. Hmm... Speaking of
hamburger, do cows, when they need a protien supplement, get to eat
unfit-for-human-consumption beef by-products, or is that just not
economical?
-Mike "parts is parts" Gainer
Flash Sheridan
John Fereira <via...@netcom.com> wrote:
>
>3. Insecticides.
Exactly. If every insect had two legally married, dedicated, nagging
parents, insects would have gotten good grades in chemistry, and we'd be
losing ground.
Flash Sheridan
Mr Toxic <mrt...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <sheridanC...@netcom.com>, sher...@netcom.com
>(Flash Sheridan) writes:
>
>
It's not merely relevant, it's crucial.
> Mankind has removed itself from it's natural
>link in the food chain.
How do you think our ancestors *got* out of their natural place low down
in the food chain? Hint: it wasn't by breeding like insects.
Hugh Bonney
Distribution: ba
Asya (as...@remarque.berkeley.edu) wrote:
: >: > Community is a reciprocal relation. It's not easy to be a member of
: >: > several except in a small way. (H.B.)
: >: Well, that may be true for you, but it's not true for many of us.
: > OK, you may be talented or something - being a real member of several
: > communities takes a commitment of time I haven't got. I'm glad to
: > know some people feel they can do it. (H.B.)
: Hugh -- you cannot (seemingly) complain about there being a lack of
: community and then say *that*. Your credibility goes South when
: you do that.
: Do you feel that there should be a community out there that will
: accept you without any work on your part? That will give to you
: without your giving to them?
: What about relationships? Will someone commit time and energy to
: being in a relationship with you without your making the same commitment
: in return?
You didn't say community, you said communities. You are right
that it takes time and effort to maintain membership in a community.
I cannot do that for *several* of them and make a living also in
a competitive environment. No more than I could be a polygamist
and make them all happy. (Saying that on ba.s is risky :-) )
Where did I say or imply that a relationship could be one-sided?
: >: "when everybody loves you, you can never be lonely..."
: > If a person thought that *everybody* loved them, salespersons for
: > penny stocks and Florida swampland would ring the phone off the
: > person's wall :-) . How about somebody, or some happy few? Would
: > someone say that everyone loved them without meaning that no one
: > in particular did? (Sorry if I don't understand this.)
: Do you know what "losing the quotes" means? ..
OK, so I scanned ba.s for author=asya and I see that, indeed, you
do kind of throw in those quotes - kind of like wearing a different
article of clothing each time. It may be a statement, but doesn't
necessarily relate to where you are. Sorry about that, I was trying
to relate it to that posting when it may or may not relate.
: "I'm always waiting for some love to arrive, I only want my fair share..."
Yes, it was supposed to be part of the Universal Health Care
package, but it got dumped in committee....
Hugh ----
Flash Sheridan
Flash Sheridan
Asya <as...@remarque.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>In article <sheridanC...@netcom.com>,
>Flash Sheridan <FlaSh...@eWorld.com> wrote:
>> you use "acceptable"
>>ambiguously; do you mean "right" or "popular"?
>
>Neither, I mean "acceptable". :)
You can't mean an ambiguity; believing that you can indicates muddy
thinking, cp. your apparent confusion over "right" per se and "right for
them", below.
>
>Divorce is no longer stigmatized,
Well, not on the coasts. But there are people from places like Chicago
who actually take marriage vows seriously. Really; I've met at least one.
---
Flash Sheridan
>
>Does anyone how this would play out in modern European cultures?
The only cross-cultural generalization I've seen on the matter that looked
like it might hold water was that female autonomy correlated with a high
rate of failed marriages. Whether that's a price worth paying is a
different issue, of course.
Mr Toxic
>>This isn't relevant.
>It's not merely relevant, it's crucial.
>> Mankind has removed itself from it's natural
>>link in the food chain.
>How do you think our ancestors *got* out of their natural place low down
>in the food chain? Hint: it wasn't by breeding like insects.
Actually, that was a part of it. If there were still just 200 of us, would
there be an Eiffel Tower? A Disneyland? A McDonald's Big Mac? (Hey, not
*every* product of progess is worth the price of admission...)
--
food chain n.
A succession of organisms in an ecological community that constitutes a
continuation of food energy from one organism to another as each consumes
a lower member and in turn is preyed upon by a higher member.
--
We've eliminated the 'higher member(s)' in our food chain. The population
of a species is held in check by its predatory higher members. We no
longer have that limitation, therefore our population is our
responsibility. If we don't accept that responsibility, we will indeed
'overrun the place'.
Check out the hedgehog population explosion in Hawaii for a practical
example of this.
--
Wayne Greenwood
mrt...@aol.com
"Don't spawn on the lawn unless you're a prawn."
Robert Sheaffer
>> : I hope that this is an OK subject in this newsgroup :-)
>> : I'm asking that because I've been out of luck, and I hope that
>> : some other of you people can help me out on that.
>> : (an ad, more or less..)
Hey, Loren, good to see you here! Don't let these animals rattle your
cage too much. The male chimps must appear fierce when the females
are watching them - surely *you* know that! (A note to regulars here:
Loren and I have been sparring
on various subjects on other newsgroups, with me attacking various P.C.
sacred cows, and he defending them. I read the guy as terminally naive,
but with a good heart.).
Your problem, Loren, will be that the Bay Area (and probably every
other major urban area in the country) is saturated with nice, kind, sincere
guys like you who just want to find a decent girlfriend and be _really
nice_ to her. The problem is that 99.9% of the decent women find a guy
like that to be a hopeless schmuck, and an utter bore. So you're
in the same position as the guy trying to sell ice to the
Esquimeaux: they already have an awful lot of it.
What women really want is someone who looks like he'd be a hot stud, and
promises to be exciting in bed - the "scared deer in the
headlights" look won't get you far.
So all of the "sensitive men" positions in local cyberspace have
certainly been filled (although I can't confirm that they're all filled by
someone named "Bob"). And I'm sure that there won't be any more openings
until well after the turn of the century. As for us Over-Educated Macho
Studs, we tend to get grabbed up quickly when we become available,
and held pretty tightly, so (from the woman's perspective) we're in
pretty short supply, as well.
>Go out. Do stuff. Be yourself. The right person will (someday) show up, and
>if you don't get real stupid, you'll realize it and hang on for the ride.
I don't concur. If this would work, he'd have a girlfriend already. My
advice: take some Insensitivity Training, and work on increasing your
Studditude.
Maybe even break down and buy a car (the more sporty, the better) so
you can impress the ladies! :)
--
Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - shea...@netcom.com
Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!
"As women and as lawyers, we must never again shy from raising our
voices against sexual harrassment. All women who care about
equality of opportunity - about integrity and morality in the
workplace - are in Professor Anita Hill's debt."
-- Hillary Rodham Clinton, 8/9/92, at an American Bar
Association luncheon honoring Anita Hill
"I want to make it very clear that this middle class tax cut, in
my view, is central to any attempt we are going to make to have
a short term economic strategy and a long term fairness
strategy, which is part of getting this country going again."
-- candidate Bill Clinton, ABC News Primary Debate,
Manchester, New Hampshire, 1/19/92
R. S. Statsinger
Robert Sheaffer <shea...@netcom.com> wrote:
|Loren and I have been sparring
|on various subjects on other newsgroups, with me attacking various P.C.
|sacred cows, and he defending them. I read the guy as terminally naive,
Maybe so, Robert. But I'll tellya this: I parachuted into this
group relatively recently, but it didn't take very long to figure
out that you don't win any friends here by attacking Cows.
Cows are *very* important to the locals here. You never in
your life saw a more stalwart group of bovinophiles.
Take my advice (from one Robert to another): don't burn
the locals.
R.S.
--
rst...@interbase.borland.com I hack for Borland.
For the punctuation-impaired: I speak for myself.
rstats at interbase dot borland dot com
Robert Sheaffer
R. S. Statsinger <rst...@hendrix.interbase.borland.com> wrote:
>In article <sheafferC...@netcom.com>,
>Robert Sheaffer <shea...@netcom.com> wrote:
>|Loren and I have been sparring
>|on various subjects on other newsgroups, with me attacking various P.C.
>|sacred cows, and he defending them. I read the guy as terminally naive,
>
>Maybe so, Robert. But I'll tellya this: I parachuted into this
>group relatively recently, but it didn't take very long to figure
>out that you don't win any friends here by attacking Cows.
>
>Cows are *very* important to the locals here. You never in
>your life saw a more stalwart group of bovinophiles.
>
>Take my advice (from one Robert to another): don't burn
>the locals.
Does this mean it's forbidden to eat hamburgers at boinks?
Is it better to cook (but not burn) the locals?
A good thing we're both "Roberts", not "Bobs," else we'd have to be
'sensitive' and all that. Then we'd be in the same fix as Loren.
Charlotte L. Blackmer
>R. S. Statsinger <rst...@hendrix.interbase.borland.com> wrote:
>>Maybe so, Robert. But I'll tellya this: I parachuted into this
>>group relatively recently, but it didn't take very long to figure
>>out that you don't win any friends here by attacking Cows.
>>Cows are *very* important to the locals here. You never in
>>your life saw a more stalwart group of bovinophiles.
>>Take my advice (from one Robert to another): don't burn
>>the locals.
>Does this mean it's forbidden to eat hamburgers at boinks?
>Is it better to cook (but not burn) the locals?
Funny you should ask...as a priestess of the ba.singles bovinian cult :-) I
was contemplating the very same thing as I viewed the specials board at the
East Bay Boink last night. Then I ordered the sirloin. I thanked all cows
for providing me with such a delicious dinner. Consumption of cow products
(milk, cheese, beef, leather-to-wear) shows HOW MUCH you care :-)
>A good thing we're both "Roberts", not "Bobs," else we'd have to be
>'sensitive' and all that. Then we'd be in the same fix as Loren.
All jokes about chocolate syrup aside (you read our new FAQ, didn't
you?)...I think the "Bob Liberation Front" is about to parachute into this
newsgroup Real Soon Now.
Charlotte (Not a Bob) Blackmer
Farms, in Berkeley? MOOOOO!
John Fereira
Charlotte L. Blackmer <c...@chiron.com> wrote:
>All jokes about chocolate syrup aside (you read our new FAQ, didn't
>you?)...I think the "Bob Liberation Front" is about to parachute into this
>newsgroup Real Soon Now.
Saw a license plate holder yesterday that said:
Forget Love
I want to fall in chocolate
--
John Fereira
Viacom Cable
Pleasanton, CA
Ed Gould
> Charlotte (Not a Bob) Blackmer
This reminds me that some time ago, someone here asked when The Bobs
would next be performing in the Bay Area. They'll be at the Great
American Music Hall on Sunday, July 17. They'll also be on West Coast
Live (KALW, 91.7, 10:00) on Saturday, the 16th, then someplace in Santa
Cruz that evening. More details from 510/THE-POOP.
--
Ed Gould e...@pa.dec.com Digital Equipment Corporation
+1 415 688 1309 Network Systems Lab 250 University Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94301
Bob R. Kenyon
> > Charlotte (Not a Bob) Blackmer
>
> This reminds me that some time ago, someone here asked when The Bobs
> would next be performing in the Bay Area. They'll be at the Great
> American Music Hall on Sunday, July 17. They'll also be on West Coast
> Live (KALW, 91.7, 10:00) on Saturday, the 16th, then someplace in Santa
> Cruz that evening. More details from 510/THE-POOP.
I saw them years ago. They were great, and I'm not just saying that 'cause
I'm a ...
--
Bob Kenyon, Mac Fanatic | "It's incredible, it's historical,
Beautiful Downtown San Jose, CA | it's very cool."
r...@rahul.net | --Alexi Lalas, US Soccer Team
| on beating Colombia 2-1
Flash Sheridan
Mr Toxic <mrt...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <sheridanC...@netcom.com>, sher...@netcom.com (Flash
>Sheridan) writes:
>
>>>This isn't relevant.
>
>>It's not merely relevant, it's crucial.
>
>>> Mankind has removed itself from it's natural
>>>link in the food chain.
>
>>How do you think our ancestors *got* out of their natural place low down
>>in the food chain? Hint: it wasn't by breeding like insects.
>
>Actually, that was a part of it. If there were still just 200 of us,
Debate Fallacy #17: If your opponent criticizes one extreme, don't claim
that he's advocating the other extreme.
Flash Sheridan
>
>I don't concur. If this would work, he'd have a girlfriend already. My
Could you post some addresses please, with rates and capsule reviews?
I've been making some progress on my own, but I'm always willing to learn
from experts.
Mr Toxic
>>>> Mankind has removed itself from it's natural
>>>>link in the food chain.
>>
>>>How do you think our ancestors *got* out of their natural place low
down
>>>in the food chain? Hint: it wasn't by breeding like insects.
>>
>>Actually, that was a part of it. If there were still just 200 of us,
>Debate Fallacy #17: If your opponent criticizes one extreme, don't claim
>that he's advocating the other extreme.
The 'debate' score so far: A couple of Ecosystem 101 facts right out of
the textbook, some pretty straight-forward logic, and a current real world
example, versus...
...a hint.
Tell you what: I'll just exercise my right not to spawn, and we can leave
it at that. I don't think my kids would be EPA-approved anyway...
--
Wayne Greenwood
mrt...@aol.com
Glenn Mandelkern
The reason I ask is that the first article in this thread was posted by
a young guy in his early 30's wanting to know where he could meet
informed people, preferrably female. Since it's a subject I'm also
interested in, I thought it be great to read.
However, what I'd like to know is how did this thread deteriorate into
talk about population control?
If other readers have suggestions directly related to the "Subject:"
line above, how about supplying us with a few samples?
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
Glenn Mandelkern Hee, hee, hee, hee!
gma...@megatest.com Questor the Elf lives!
(408) 451-3270
John Fereira
>The reason I ask is that the first article in this thread was posted by
>a young guy in his early 30's wanting to know where he could meet
>informed people, preferrably female. Since it's a subject I'm also
>interested in, I thought it be great to read.
It's also a subject that is probably more appropriate for alt.personals
>However, what I'd like to know is how did this thread deteriorate into
>talk about population control?
Welcome to ba.singles.
Marcel Blonk
: However, what I'd like to know is how did this thread deteriorate into
: talk about population control?
You're getting it all wrong. This thread has not *deteriorated" into a
population control debate, but rather expanded onto a forum in which
not just the original question is discussed, but also the demographic
revolution that ultimately caused the question to be asked.
We will soon start the development of this thread into a real
metaphysical soapbox, on which we will build the Ultimate Unifying
Theory Of BA Single Women And Their Attachments which will explain why
the universe was build like an ice cream cone, why gravity works on
peanut butter and why Nice Guys [tm] don't get laid.
I would hereby ask everyone to not cloud the issue with discussions about
"Places to Meet People", as I am very anxious to get the answer to these
burning questions as soon as possible.
Robert Sheaffer
Eureka! I've long believed that this "workshop" racket was the closest
thing to the fabled Royal Road to Riches. But how to do it? All the
good stuff has already been workshopped to death: Growth, Healing,
Sobering Up, Sensitivity, Communications..... but hot dog, I can be
the first to offer seminars for Insensitivity Training. Then all the
poor unfortunates like Loren (and various sensitive guys named Bob)
might have a chance for a normal life.
OK, folks, I'm beginning the Marketing Research phase of my seminars.
1. What kind of Insensitivity are you the most eager to develop?
2. (important) How much are you willing to pay for it?
3. (if you're a woman) Are you good looking, and if so, what kinds
of things make you get the hots for seminar gurus?
Derek LeLash
>Is my newsreader screwed up?
>
>The reason I ask is that the first article in this thread was posted by
>a young guy in his early 30's wanting to know where he could meet
>informed people, preferrably female. Since it's a subject I'm also
>interested in, I thought it be great to read.
>
>However, what I'd like to know is how did this thread deteriorate into
>talk about population control?
>
Don't get trapped by your high expectations, especially around here.
Derek
--
Derek LeLash, SrTechWriter/INFP | "Do you still love me, Chuck?"
BASYS Automation Systems, Inc. | "It's hard to love someone who hits you in
home: de...@netcom.com | the head with a bean ball."
work: de...@scooter.amc.dec.com | "You were crowding the plate, Chuck."
Mr Toxic
Blonk) writes:
>Ultimate Unifying Theory Of BA Single Women And Their Attachments
Are ba.singles women modular? "Yes, I'd like the D-cup option, please."
--
Wayne Greenwood
mrt...@aol.com
Mr Toxic
Sheaffer) writes:
>I can be the first to offer seminars for Insensitivity Training.
>Then all the poor unfortunates like Loren (and various sensitive
>guys named Bob) might have a chance for a normal life.
>
>OK, folks, I'm beginning the Marketing Research phase of my seminars.
>
>1. What kind of Insensitivity are you the most eager to develop?
>
>2. (important) How much are you willing to pay for it?
I don't give a damn about your training course, and I couldn't care less
about your survey.
Hey!... I'm cured!
--
Wayne Greenwood
mrt...@aol.com
tim moore
Yes, the reader of the news is.
>informed people, preferrably female. Since it's a subject I'm also
>interested in, I thought it be great to read.
Oops! You fucked up!
>However, what I'd like to know is how did this thread deteriorate into
>talk about population control?
You fucked up. Why blame anyone else?
>If other readers have suggestions directly related to the "Subject:"
>line above, how about supplying us with a few samples?
How about listening for awhile before offering your best stuff?
>Glenn Mandelkern Hee, hee, hee, hee!
Kind of a girlieMohawkBarbie laugh, isn't it Glenn? BTW, us ba.singlers* are all
PowerToolTypes, the current popular choice being a chainsaw.
* Bovine & preference non-specific
>gma...@megatest.com Questor the Elf lives!
Also, we do have a requirement that you be either bovine or human derived to
participate in this group. No Aliens, Children or Mythical Creatures (some of
us do fuck elves on occasion, but its a quiet thing).
--
Tim is distributed, but not owned by:
Digital Equipment / Palo Alto
Hugh Bonney
: Is my newsreader screwed up?
: .....
: However, what I'd like to know is how did this thread deteriorate into
: talk about population control?
The thread changed into a discussion of the rationalizations that
people have developed to avoid thinking about the original subject,
so it's fairly logical.
Many threads just degenerate into a personal flame war, so this
one wasn't too bad really.
Hugh --------
Gary Allman
Blonk) writes:
>
>Ultimate Unifying Theory Of BA Single Women And Their Attachments
As someone said, most guys are interested in tool talk.
Loren I. Petrich
>The reason I ask is that the first article in this thread was posted by
>a young guy in his early 30's wanting to know where he could meet
>informed people, preferrably female. Since it's a subject I'm also
>interested in, I thought it be great to read.
>However, what I'd like to know is how did this thread deteriorate into
>talk about population control?
I, too, am disappointed in a lack of serious response to my
posting. I was accused of posting a personals-type ad, and it's not my
fault that a request for info on good places to meet people should
look like such an ad.
At least there's _someone_ civilized on the net :-)
--
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/l...@s1.gov
/ Happiness is a fast Macintosh
/ And a fast train
Joe Buck
In article <Csu9E...@megatest.com>,
Glenn Mandelkern <gma...@megatest.com> wrote:
>The reason I ask is that the first article in this thread was posted by
>a young guy in his early 30's wanting to know where he could meet
>informed people, preferrably female. Since it's a subject I'm also
>interested in, I thought it be great to read.
via...@netcom.com (John Fereira) writes:
>It's also a subject that is probably more appropriate for alt.personals
I don't see why you think so, John. This subject has been discussed to
death on ba.singles, soc.singles, and net.singles in the past. Why is
it suddenly inappropriate and why are the only subjects now allowed who
said what to who at the last boink? alt.personals would only be
appropriate if the article is about why women should want to meet one
man in particular, the author.
So where can a young guy in his early 30's meet informed people,
preferably female? Here are a few ideas:
* Take a night class (and not on a technical subject). Cooking, some form
of art, learn a foreign language, but something you have some interest in.
You might even meet other people, maybe even female. An acting class is
particularly good for getting to know your classmates and getting over
some shyness.
* Do volunteer work (this goes for anyone who thinks all the MOTAS they meet
are jerks -- you're much more likely to meet caring, giving people).
* Do one of those personal-growth seminars you see so many flames about here
(hi, David Carter). When I did this a number of years ago, I met a huge number
of interesting, attractive, well-educated women, one of whom I married
a couple of years later (so I'm another of those married interlopers, but
I refuse to go out with Howeird).
--
-- Joe Buck <jb...@synopsys.com>
Posting from but not speaking for Synopsys, Inc.
***** Stamp out junk e-mail spamming! If someone sends you a junk e-mail
***** ad just because you posted in comp.foo, boycott their company.
Michael Ferreira
be in the area tomarrow.
The Mediterranian Club is hosting the 10th annual Bastille Day
Snail races at 2:00PM tomarrow 7-16-94.
I personally won $50 betting on them last year.
I had two entries, slugger, and S-Car-Go.
Slugger won two races, S-Car-Go wasn't worth his salt.
Thoughbred snail are available at the club for a nominalfee.
This event is major fun.
Asya
> I, too, am disappointed in a lack of serious response to my
>posting. I was accused of posting a personals-type ad, and it's not my
>fault that a request for info on good places to meet people should
>look like such an ad.
Hey, Loren, I've read your stuff in other newsgroups, so I know you're
not stoopid, so you tell me what the difference is between these two:
1) Where would a guy in his 30's meet women other than bars? More
specifically, do you know of any such places in << >> area?
2) Where would a SWM 6'2'' 190 lbs male find an attractive woman
<list many very specific qualities here>>.
--
Asya Kamsky Life is hard, you have to change
Santa Cruz, CA
Marcel Blonk
> I was accused of posting a personals-type ad,
> and it's not my fault that a request for info on good places to meet
> people should look like such an ad.
I admit it. I never meant to do it, but I couldn't help myself. I tried to
resist but it was stronger then me. It was *me* who made his request for
info look like a personals-type ad.
Cregg Lund
>
> Many threads just degenerate into a personal flame war, ...
You say that like its a bad thing.
Lobster King