In the course of amassing my 473 “followers” on Twitter, I’ve had a number of folks whose photo is similar to this one appear (not exactly like this one; this one’s pretty unique, but similar), only to get the heave-ho from the enforcers of propriety at that service, whoever they may be and however they find out about it.
But those are usually come-ons for porn sites. This one doesn’t seem to be that (at least, there’s no link to such a Web site). And I guess because it doesn’t seem to be that, this follower remains there, right behind me. I keep looking back to check, and yep, she’s still there.
I Googled the name (by the way, have you seen Google today — they’ve changed their name to “Topeka” in reaction to those strumpets in Topeka changing their name to Google in a desperate, attention-grabbing attempt to wrest Google Fiber away from Columbia) on the profile page, and learned nothing.
So is this random, or is this a real person — (gulp) — in the Columbia area, someone I might run into. No way am I going to direct-message her. Why, if I were seen speaking to this woman even in what we used to quaintly call Cyberspace, it could create a far greater scandal than the one engendered by my taking money from the Mizzell campaign (and the Plaugh campaign, and Morrison campaign, and the Waters campaign…).
Of course, I don’t even know if this follower is a she. I mean, I’m pretty sure the person in the picture is a she, but …
Oh, the less said the better. But she’s been there for like a week…
Hope this is April Fool. Funny.
M A R Y R O S H?
Aieeee!
Now you know, I’m going to be really embarrassed when this turns out to be someone in our community.
Let me say right now that I’m sure she’s a very nice lady…
Please keep us abreast of how your search turns out.
It’s probably Donnie Myers in drag.
In related news…Teflon Don may be Catholicizing himself. God help us all. BTW — that shyster @ Sunlit Uplands, that Daniel Cassidy, may be aiding and abetting this Catholicizing. What a twit.
Happy Holy Days!
Nice save! Only after publicly questioning her gender.
Well, what I meant by that, of course, was that there was no way of knowing whether that picture was actually of the person who created the Twitter account. Or whether the person’s name is really “Hortensia Depauw“…
Oh noes!
The *comment* was not for public consumption.
😮
She has many protrusions, but none are an Adam’s apple, so I’m thinking she was born female. Now whether the rest of her is natural born is up for question…naw, natural protrusions, her two magnificent parts, don’t defy gravity like that. Do they do helium implants now?
Meow
OK, one more time, just to be PERFECTLY CLEAR, as Dick Nixon would say:
I am QUITE CERTAIN that the person in the picture is a woman. I would never call the issue into doubt. I pretty much would have wasted all these years of living if I could look at that picture and wonder whether that’s a woman.
My point was, I have no idea whether that is actually a picture of the person who is following me, “Lettiebxzwp,” a.k.a. “Hortensia Depauw.”
In fact, Doug just made reference above (the comment before the one with the pun) to a person — an unperson, rather — who long commented on my old blog pretending to be a woman…
I, too, have had mysterious women “follow” me on Twitter, and they seem odd. I figure it’s some sort of hustle and ignore them.
@ Burl, I never followed you on Twitter, promise…
Well, she does have nice eyes….