Exposing Online Dating for What It Truly Is . . . or Rather, Will Be

At some point in my later years, I am going to write a novella about my experiences with online dating services.

I figure that by the time I get around to doing so, that those particular services will be passé, having gone the way of the way of the mimeograph machine, Pong, and the Dodo bird.

However, there will be those stalwart few who through mega-vitamin therapy, cryogenics, or something new that Estee Lauder is marketing are still alive to read it.

By the time I write my expose’ and tale of woe, or knock-on-simulated-wood tale of success,  couples will be matched from birth to produce the most intelligent and beautiful offspring. Those who have slightly higher intelligence and looks will be relegated to sales and procreation only for the sake of bringing forth more salespeople. Anyone with average intelligence and looks will be servants, since no one looks at them anyway and they will be allowed procreation in order to keep up the supply of Walmart greeters (everyone knows there  are never any available cashiers at Walmart) and Steak-n-Shake waiters/waitresses.

And for all of those whose looks do not pass muster, or whose intelligence is sub-par according to the government agencies, they will be either euthanized or used in experimental procedures—like testing cosmetics or new medicines.

In the meantime, while I await all of the upcoming events, I will just say that online dating is a bit like being a cantaloupe in the fruit aisle. You are sniffed, weighed, squeezed, listened to briefly for some God knows why reason, and then may or may not be added to the cart along with the other hopeful consumables.

If, after a day or two, you are not chosen, the head of the Fruits,either chops you in half and wraps you in cellophane, or scoops you out and mixes you with other melons to make you more attractive.

It’s always about the melons.

Those Famous Lesser-Known Editing Symbols You All Love - The Untold Story

On Monday morning, June 11, 2012, I posted a graphic I had schmooshed together in that old standby - Paint - and posted  it on my Facebook Page under the header of:

New additions to accepted copy editing/proofreading symbols. In case I ever have the privilege of working on one of your books . . .

Since then, it has been shared 6,139 times! That is only the number of legitimate shares, and not the shares from readers who saved the image and posted it without attribution - shame on you!

I am absolutely floored by this! However, I just wanted to make sure that the original authors of these updated copy editing and proofreading symbols were once again lauded and thanked, as I did in my original posting.

Thank you to Brian Klems, whose original post was read by me on Writer's Digest page in August of 2011. Since that date, his symbols have been hanging over my desk.

And thank you to Eve Corbel, whose graphic I found on Monday morning at Angela Cothran's Blog.

I am thrilled to have shared this schmooshy graphic with you, and really happy I can let the whole world know, or at least a few thousand writers and editors, who the original authors are.