Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site unc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!mcnc!unc!fsks From: fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) Newsgroups: net.singles,net.social Subject: Re: new disabbreviation for SO Message-ID: <150@unc.UUCP> Date: Sun, 3-Mar-85 13:42:42 EST Article-I.D.: unc.150 Posted: Sun Mar 3 13:42:42 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 6-Mar-85 02:44:41 EST References: <1613@ittvax.UUCP><90@unc.UUCP> <602@wlcrjs.UUCP> <1326@watcgl.UUCP> Reply-To: fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) Organization: CS Dept., U. of N. Carolina at Chapel Hill Lines: 23 Xref: watmath net.singles:6103 net.social:496 Summary: In article jss@sjuvax.UUCP (J. Shapiro) writes: >[Aren't you hungry...?] > > Having watched this discussion some, my impression is that the major >problem with SO being replaced by boyfriend/girlfriend/lover is that these >carry connotations that aren't necessarily wanted. > > Perhaps it is safe to say that "close friend" covers all of the bases >people want in SO. On the other hand, assuming that sex can only happen >with close friends is imposing my own values on the terms, and SO is >intended to have that kind of nebulous flexibility. > >Jon Shapiro Nebulous flexibility???? Are you recommending Hague-speak (re: Gen. Alexander Hague)? If you don't want your listeners or readers to infer any details about your relationship, then just shutup about it. Don't pollute the net with "nebulously flexible" (i.e. meaningless) jargon. Frank Silbermann University of North Carolina