Monday, December 9, 2013
Recently a grand niece of my husband named her child "ETHEN" rather than using the standard spelling of "ETHAN". I reminded her that her own sister has struggled with her name being spelled "STEPHENIE" rather than "STEPHANIE"! Until I gave Steph a bracelet with "Stephenie" on it, she said she'd never seen her name spelled "right"!
In selling charms, it is a sure-fire sale if I can guarantee a name will be spelled "right" ("Yes, Kaytelyn, I can get it spelled correctly!", I said just last week.) My biggest selling point is that I can have ANY name inscribed on a charm. I call them the "names du jour". My supplier and I have an ongoing competition (CLICK HERE to see BLOG article: NEVAEH)
This month I have had five spellings of the same name: Kallie, Calleigh, Kalli, Calli, and Callie! It's the name du mois! (I can't help myself: mois is French for month!)
Over the years, I have read numerous articles which tell the problems of having unusual names! Today "THE WISE GEEK" published the following:
People who have uncommon names tend to be happier.
A person’s name might affect his or her happiness, because people who have rare names report higher levels of happiness than those with more common names, research shows. Researchers believe this could be the result of humans’ subconscious desire to be considered unique from others.
Research also reveals that people who have common names are likely to rate their names as being more rare than they actually are, a psychology term referred to as the false uniqueness effect.
I doubt this assertion. I notice that no "research" information is cited. CLICK HERE to see an article which dispels that notion.
Sunday, December 8, 2013
Waiting is tolerable if I have "interesting" people to view! Today I was in the waiting room at our hospital and there was a splendid panoply of people and their outfits for me to enjoy! It's difficult to believe how some people go out in public. (CLICK HERE to check the "Walmartians" or Google for more!)
The first person who came in was a petite woman who was obviously dressed for the weather. She was wearing gray sweat pants which were tucked into rather stylish black boots. She was wearing a black suede jacket, black suede gloves accompanied with a green hat and matching scarf; she was carrying a small, black Coach purse. Since she was so "matchy-matchy" (that's a derisive term from the Fashion Police), and coordinated, I thought she might be of my generation, but I must admit I am totally incompetent at guessing age. I judged her to be in her 60s because of her shuffling gait when she walked in (but that might have been from the boots), and she looked like, as my brothers would say, "she was rode hard and put up wet"! She had rough skin and deep wrinkles, but I could see dark hair visible from under her hat. After our opening conversation gambit about the weather, she asked why I was there and then I asked her the same and she told me her daughter was there. As we were talking, I noticed that she still had her natural teeth; I thought that she might be younger than I had originally thought. I asked her daughter's age, but I was floored when she said, "18; she'll be 19 in January." I began adding and subtracting in my head and I thought, "If she were 18 when she was born, that would make her 36; 18 plus 25 would make her only 43; 18 plus 35 would make her 53; well, she's probably in her 50s." NO, I didn't have the crassness to ask her age!
When her name was called, she got up and I saw that PINK was appliqued on the rear of the sweat pants! That might be appropriate for a thirteen-year-old, but not for someone who has an 18-year-old daughter! How disappointing to see that from a "woman of a certain age"! When I told Les he said, "At least it didn't have JUICY!"
I thought, "I wonder if these people are assessing me?" I was wearing brown shoes, brown slacks, white blouse, and a camel-colored jacket. My overcoat was taupe and my gloves were brown.
I looked down at my Burberry purse and thought, "That looks very springish; I should have used a dark brown purse."
As I was contemplating my possible fashion faux pas, a woman walked in wearing a parka with a fur-lined hood, Crocs, and SHORTS!
Saturday, December 7, 2013
Selling at craft shows each weekend for the past month, I've been "out among 'em", meeting greatly diverse shoppers and fellow vendors.
It's time for a new collection of CRINGE--FAYETTE COUNTY TALK:
JEWLERY rather than jewelry
BIDNESS rather than business
WADN'T rather than wasn't
SOSE rather than so as
NOTHER rather than other
ACROSSED rather than across
REOCCUR rather than recur
AKS rather than ask
SNUCK rather than sneaked
HEIGHTH rather than height
CANNIDATE rather than candidate
SUPPOSABLY rather than supposedly
DOGGY-DOG WORLD rather than dog-eat-dog world
UPMOST rather than utmost
EXCAPE rather than escape
HEIGHTH rather than HEIGHT
PROBLY rather than probably
And, of course, the Fayette County constant:
IDEAL rather than idea
And this one, especially for my friend Patty, who thinks I am picayune about FORTE:
FORTE: it is pronounced FORT unless speaking of music. I wouldn't have mentioned it but it was said by an OSU graduate who said, "That's my FOR-TAY!" in response to a person inquiring about a product. In a short conversation, the OSU connection was mentioned TWICE! No, Patty, I didn't correct the very proud OSU alumna as I was hopeful of selling OSU charms!
Friday, December 6, 2013
Then I called the telephone number from the check; it was an answering machine with a demonstrably foreign accent. I left a message. Next I Googled the business name and learned that the "business" is owned by Larry Cohen and has 1 employee and the revenues last year were $50,000. The phone number from that site was different than the number on the check. I called that number and the voice of "Larry Cohen" was on that answering machine. I asked for him to call me.
I called our local Sheriff's office and the person showed no interest in taking any information and told me to call the Attorney General. The number I was given by the local Sheriff's Department was for the wrong department; I went online and found the correct number to call. I was instructed to mail all of the items and what I'd learned.
Of course, I never heard from the first number nor the second number I'd called; however, I received a call from the Missouri Attorney General's personnel, which impressed me a great deal.
Of course, I recognized it as the scam. Other "elderly" people might fall for them.
I had a client who sent out at least 5 sweepstakes entries weekly. He actually believed the sweepstakes offers he received were legitimate and he donated money to nearly all of them. He had been giving $10.00 a month to one organization. I went online and showed him that only 1% of the revenues went to any cancer-related organization. On one offer in particular he showed me a letter "guaranteeing" a win. I said, "Read the fine print; it says IF your name is chosen", but the proof did not phase him; he was certain he would win and kept donating; I told him I would bet him $1,000 that he would NOT receive the check. (Boy, I would have been sorry for that one IF he had won!)
He even kept submitting entries in his late wife's name, and told me that his attorney had told him that he could receive the winnings. I told him, "That would be only for ones she submitted before she died." He sincerely believed that he could continue entering in his wife's name and receive the money!
I went online and showed him that the only legitimate one he was donating to was St. Jude's; all the others were just money pits for unscrupulous con men. One organization had 5 different scams in its organization: one was for Kids With Cancer and four other cancer-related "sweepstakes"! My client was donating to all of them. When I showed him that the CEO was being paid nearly a million dollars, and that the donations had been only 3 million; and that 98% of the funds were for "overhead". As a former businessman, the client finally realized it was a massive scam. He did quit that one but there are at least 10 others to take its place.
He obviously has money to burn. I calculated that he spends more than $200 per year in postage and more than $2,000 in donations to the sweepstakes scams.
Thursday, December 5, 2013
Recently, I was helping a nephew set up in his apartment. Another family member (just a year older than I) had kindly brought many cleaning supplies, among which were sponges. I told my nephew to use them only once and stated that they were the "dirtiest household item". The other family member took exception and said that she'd used them "all her life". My exclamation of "EEWWWW" was not greeted warmly. She said that they can be put in the dishwasher and I countered with the argument that the water didn't get hot enough to kill the bacteria. She said that they could be put in the microwave or boiled. Another "EEWWW" was my counter-argument.
See the lengthy BLOG article here from "The Parsimonious Princess": The Dirty Truth: Get Rid Of Your Kitchen Sponge.
Also see the article below from THE WISE GEEK:
The dirtiest household item is often a kitchen sponge, with more than 75% of all sponges containing potential fecal bacteria, research has shown. Kitchen sponges have been found to be more than 200,000 times dirtier than toilet seats. The average kitchen sponge is thought to contain more than 10 million bacteria per square inch (6.45 square cm), which is typically the result of its moisture levels and small crevices that allow germs to breed. The risk of spreading germs with a kitchen sponge can be reduced by microwaving it to kill bacteria.
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
If you would like to receive my BLOG in your email, go to the right side of my BLOG to the new item called "Follow by Email" and enter your email address. A confirmation block will appear with a captcha; complete the information and a confirmation will be sent to your email. You must click on the confirmation to activate the service.
I hope you like the new option and share my articles with others.