Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sdcsvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!lewak
From: lewak@sdcsvax.UUCP (George Lewak)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Re: Nominally single???? A voice from the past.
Message-ID: <1152@sdcsvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 21-Oct-85 14:26:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcsvax.1152
Posted: Mon Oct 21 14:26:05 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 24-Oct-85 00:28:37 EDT
References: <285@whuts.UUCP> <533@oakhill.UUCP> <286@whuts.UUCP>
Reply-To: lewak@sdcsvax.UUCP (George lewak)
Organization: EECS Dept. U.C. San Diego
Lines: 34
Summary: 

In article <327@whuts.UUCP> amc@whuts.UUCP (Andy Cohill) writes:

Heather says:
>> ... So I guess my question, after all this long-winded nonsense, is
>> this: at what point would *you* like to be told that a new
>> acquaintance is 'unavailable'?
>

Andy says:
>Right away, I guess. As Heather mentioned, it *is* better to get the
>sexual stuff out of the way immediately. Of course, once that
>happens, it takes some of the excitement out of the potential
>relationship. 'Course, I have to admit it was more like nervous
>tension and acid stomach than excitement. 
>
>Actually, what would appeal to me most is being slammed up against a
>wall by a new acquaintance and being told, "Look, bub, I'm taken, so
>back off." There is just no chance of mis-understanding or
>mis-interpretation by either party in that case...

I said:
>I never want my new acquaintance to tell me bluntly.  If
>were interested in her as a potential SO, I would somehow
>find out for myself.

I say now:

	Obviously, some people have a different opinion of what
	is appropriate.  Well, I guess you can't please
	everybody.  But, I *absolutely do not* like it when
	a woman is cruel to me when she lets me know she is unavailable.
	Being cruel can gaurantee that we will never be friends.

				Victor