Tweet
So this is in relation to a friend of mine. Said friend and I are on Facebook.
Lately however, she has had this annoying tendency to post a status, then five minutes later turn around and delete that status. The kicker? None of the statuses in question are ones that would incriminate her work wise.
A few of them are motivational quotes. A few of them are ones that are relating to something legs, whether it's her personal or romantic life. Of course, the ones mentioning a date or a double date are among the ones deleted. We see them, we know they've existed. They haven't even had someone write on them!
The thing which prompts this post? Last night she made mention to a friend of hers doing some things which blur the line between friendship and romance. Earlier she had posted a photo featuring a rifle and ice cream...a specific brand of ice cream. The friend went unnamed, the photos however...while they also went unnamed, I knew who owned the gun. My SO knew who owned the gun. There is only one person between the four of us who owns that specific brand of rifle (personal interest of his), all of her other gun-nut friends either have smaller guns, use a crossbow instead or borrow guns out at the shooting range.*
She has made so many references to her unnamed "date" in those deleted posts and her unnamed "friend' in ones that we do see. Normally though, she will gush over a date, or even when she's hanging around cute men. She also does tag friends in posts when she's going out and doing stuff. Has she done it in any of the posts she's deleted or made references to her "friend"? No.
So yes, I am going to put two and two together and come up with four. If that two and two happens to come to 5 instead, then stop making so many references to it being four in the first place!
On top of that, she is now annoyed at me because I have mentioned those deleted statuses on a couple of occasions. I also asked last night if the 'friend' was who I thought it was. All she could have done was said who it was, she didn't even have to give a name. A simple yes or no could've sufficed.
Lately however, she has had this annoying tendency to post a status, then five minutes later turn around and delete that status. The kicker? None of the statuses in question are ones that would incriminate her work wise.
A few of them are motivational quotes. A few of them are ones that are relating to something legs, whether it's her personal or romantic life. Of course, the ones mentioning a date or a double date are among the ones deleted. We see them, we know they've existed. They haven't even had someone write on them!
The thing which prompts this post? Last night she made mention to a friend of hers doing some things which blur the line between friendship and romance. Earlier she had posted a photo featuring a rifle and ice cream...a specific brand of ice cream. The friend went unnamed, the photos however...while they also went unnamed, I knew who owned the gun. My SO knew who owned the gun. There is only one person between the four of us who owns that specific brand of rifle (personal interest of his), all of her other gun-nut friends either have smaller guns, use a crossbow instead or borrow guns out at the shooting range.*
She has made so many references to her unnamed "date" in those deleted posts and her unnamed "friend' in ones that we do see. Normally though, she will gush over a date, or even when she's hanging around cute men. She also does tag friends in posts when she's going out and doing stuff. Has she done it in any of the posts she's deleted or made references to her "friend"? No.
So yes, I am going to put two and two together and come up with four. If that two and two happens to come to 5 instead, then stop making so many references to it being four in the first place!
On top of that, she is now annoyed at me because I have mentioned those deleted statuses on a couple of occasions. I also asked last night if the 'friend' was who I thought it was. All she could have done was said who it was, she didn't even have to give a name. A simple yes or no could've sufficed.
Comment