Some time ago the Google Blogger added a "Followers" option that you could add to your blog. It seemed an innocuous thing. I added it and put it way at the bottom of the blog.There is also a Feed Subscriber link on this blog. I get Subscriber info via Feedburner. The number of Subscribers, of late, goes up and down, erratically. One day it'll be 466, the next day the number will be 213, the day after that it'll be 488.
I have trouble believing that there are all these people out there subscribing, and then unsubscribing. And then more subscribing.
And, what is the purpose of having both Subscribers and Followers?
So, yesterday I got another Follower. Called "angnts in the pants."
I assume "angnts" had intended "angst" not "angnts".
But you never know. That is a picture of "angnts in the pants" looking all black and white, well, actually, mostly gray.
"angnts" seems to evidence a slight resemblance to a plus-sized version of the Queen of Wink. Looking at the profile, on the "angnts in the pants" blog, I see she is both an educator and a mother and is in the United States. All in common with the Queen of Wink.
Why would the Queen of Wink be having angst in her pants? I really have no idea. I know that recently she has talked of unleashing a flood of something on someone or thing. This flood could be angst related, for all I know.
This makes 2 times this week I've thought the Queen of Wink may be activating a new identity. A couple days ago I thought the Queen might be Zelda del West & Lulu Lopez. I have since been disabused of that erroneous notion.
I feel more certain that the Queen of Wink is Angst (spelling corrected) in the Pants than I was that she was Zelda del West & Lulu Lopez. Then again, it's not like the Queen of Wink to misspell something as easy to spell as angst.
It's all very perplexing.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers.” (gravity's rainbow, proverbs for paranoids.) ;)
ReplyDeletest in the pants + ants in the pants = angnst in the pants
ReplyDeleteHow clever...again, a quality of which I don't possess. Seems unnerving that you're continually trying to don me with a new identity...what's wrong with the one I have?
ReplyDeleteyoung don is not Don Young, BTW.
ReplyDeleteDY, I was fairly certain "young don" was not Don Young, but thanks for confirming. I have trouble understanding what "young don" is trying to say, most of the time, while "old don" I usually understand.
ReplyDeleteCT2---You are being way too easily unnerved. I don't think there has been a continuing attempt to don you with a new identity. It's only been in the past week there have been two incidents where it seemed as if an identity might be you. And you have been restless, of late, so trying out a new identity, or two, does not seem all that farfetched to me. I really don't think anyone has suggested there is anything wrong with your current default identity.
ReplyDeleteSo, having said all that, are you saying that you are not Angst in the Pants?
I think revealing whether or not I'm Angst in the Pants is a bit too revealing.
ReplyDeleteANGST in the pants + ANTS in the pants = ANGNST in the pants
ReplyDeleteNow older don is confusing me as much as young don.
ReplyDeleteCT2---I think it is too late in the reveal to worry about revealing the Angst in your Pants.
ReplyDeleteCT&CT, in answer to your question about donning you with a new identity I overheard him say at the buffet line last night " I don no!"
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, I don't remember saying "I don no." But then again, I have a habit of not listening to myself.
ReplyDelete