Yes, it is dangerous to ask this particular rhetorical question in public.
Nonetheless. Once again, I'm perplexed at how frequently match.com guys can:
a) drool over a profile;
b) wink at the girl in the profile;
c) get all excited when the girl--who rightly should be dismayed that such a man is winking instead of wooing her more eloquently--actually writes back;
d) respond anew, in cheeky spirit, saying how much he hopes the girl writes again; and then
e) not respond when the girl writes again.
I mean, really. As my father might exclaim (and often does when watching professional sports on television), "That's bush league!" And not in a W sort of way.
Obviously the man in the Kansas City hat never took to my witty banter about teaching him golf. Which constitutes the third time in a month a prospect--who appears prospective in a number of ways--begs me to write and chat. And then disappears when I do.
So what in my responses causes these men to run for the hills.... adjective overuse?
Sheesh.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Not repulsive at all! Keep in mind that the "thrill of the hunt" has an intrinsic attraction all its own regardless whether it happens in the bar or online. It is highly plausible that these men enjoy the chase more than the acquisition and your writing style has nothing to do with their lack of follow up communication. Don't let that discourage you! The ones that are able to sustain the communication are the ones that appreciate your time, wit and energy even if they aren't as flashy up front.
Post a Comment