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