Are you trying to kill me?

I mean, seriously.

What inspired you to write the book? To take on a social issue that is sometimes overlooked. That issue was Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PSDT).

I have to admit he's right on this one: PSDT is very often overlooked. Even when talking about posttraumatic stress disorder, you never seem to hear about PSDT.

And no, this is not a typo, nor is this an issue of translation. He uses this acronym several times throughout his questionnaire, including on the final question:

What sets your book apart? The book does deal with several aspects of PSDT of which I have researched a great deal.

So you researched this a great deal. Really. Because you don't even know what this condition is actually called. So that kind of leads to an issue with your credibility, doesn't it? Or perhaps you researched PSDT a great deal, which is also problematic for a book about posttraumatic stress disorder.

Personally, I'm hoping he did a great deal of research about Privalomojo Sveikatos Draudimo Tarybos.

Another colloquialism gone awry

One of the most amusing parts of my job is reading what people think typical colloquialisms actually say. Yes, we all know the ones like for all intensive purposes. But what about don't lick a gift horse in the mouth or Chester drawers instead of chest of drawers? 

Today's is more subtle, but it entertains me nonetheless. The phrase is for Christ's sake. As in, for the good/advantage/wellbeing of Christ. It's not for Christ Sake. 

Given the capitalization, I can only assume that whatever we're doing is not for the good of Jesus Christ; it is to obtain a specific brand of fermented rice alcohol.

Segue to a Backstory

As she looked around at her surroundings, her thoughts drifted to her life up to that point.

So her thoughts drifted to...her thoughts, basically. Good. Let's go with that. It sounds a lot better than this:

As she looked at stuff, she thought about a convenient segue to her backstory. 

Why do I read this crap?

I have no idea why I read my local NBC affiliate's website. But this one is just brilliant. 

Blackshades, we’re not talking about sunglasses. I'd like to know what journalism school is teaching this sort of grammar. A comma here makes no sense at all. Are you talking to someone named Blackshades? That's all I can guess. In fact, the total opposite. So we're talking about the total opposite of sunglasses. Of course. It's a type of malware that has made national headlines, and is making some people think twice about what they do in front of their computer. Oh, right. Because apparently malware is the opposite of sunglasses. I can see the universe in which that makes sense. 

Nick Davis is an I.T. Security Architect at UW-Madison, and says it's easy for a hacker to break into your device. I love the fact that this journalist feels the need to use commas and conjunctions to join incomplete sentences. That's totally a thing.

"You'll receive an email from someone you don't know, but it will seem like a legitimate email. You’ll click on the attachment, and nothing will happen. But in the background, very quietly the malware blackshades, will install itself on your computer,” said Davis. I'm confused. What's with the comma after blackshades? And should that be capitalized? That asshole Davis must not have specified in his quote.

Blackshades made headlines last year. Complete sentence. Good job. After a college student hacked into Miss Teen USA’s web cam, spying, snapping naked photos and even blackmailing her. Not a complete sentence. Bad job.

"It allows an attacker to remotely enable your web cam on your laptop, or your desktop machine and then it sends pictures to them from a remote location,” said Davis. So you thought you should put a comma before or, despite it not being used as a conjunction, but you didn't feel like putting a comma before the conjunction and. I just don't get it.

It doesn't stop there.Well, I'd hope not. This would be a pretty short, boring article.

“I do all my banking online, like investing is online, I pay all my credit card bills online,” said UW-Madison student, Erin Jamar. This is a great quote. Note how the verb tenses stay the same, and there are no comma splices? Yes, that was sarcasm.

Once blackshades is installed, Davis says hackers can get to those too. So you installed blackshades, and then Davis said this? Probably not. Perhaps there should be a comma after Davis says. 

"You can't be 100% sure that your computer isn't infected, and I always tell people, if you can't be sure your computer isn't infected, you have to operate under the presumption that it is infected,” said Davis. This is good advice about anything. I can't be sure I really exist, so I should probably operate under the presumption that I don't. Or something. Also, presumption?

So how do you protect yourself from an attack? Um...scientology?

Davis says, the best way is to keep two separate devices in your home. Using one to surf the web, and the other to access sensitive accounts. No, guys. The comma should have gone after Davis says in that previous sentences. Here it makes no sense. Oh, wait. That second sentence isn't even a sentence. We've completely given up on trying to make sense at this point, haven't we?

"People need to learn to treat there computers as if they are underneath a public eye, because they are connected to a public network,” said Davis. I'm imagining a very large public eye with a bunch of people standing underneath it. Probably these people have there computers with them. Other fun fact: because does not require a comma. But let's be real here. That's hardly the biggest problem with this sentence.

A good lesson, but one hard to follow, in this complex internet age, where everyone thinks they're not the next target. I assume commas are like government budgets. It's the end of the article, and the guy has all these commas left over. If he doesn't shove them all into this sentence, then he loses all his commas for his next article.

"I would still have that invincible mentality. You know, it's not going to happen to me, it hasn't happened to anyone I know, even though it's obviously not true,” said Jamar. I don't know the point of this. Did this happen to Jamar? The article didn't say anything about her. In fact, the article didn't really say anything about anything. Here. I'll rewrite it for you.

Blackshades is a computer virus. It is bad.

I'm brilliant.

Subtle

"The weatherman said a storm is coming soon. He’s probably right. I wonder how long it will last." It was a dry comment in spite of the dark clouds that formed along the skyline. She wasn’t speaking about the weather.

Translation:

IT'S A METAPHOR, Y'ALL!!!

Another brilliant questionnaire

I'm not sure there's a single sentence in today's questionnaire that isn't ridiculous. This isn't even funny to me; it's just depressing. Hopefully you'll find it funny, though. At least some good could come of this.

Theme: As the collection of short stories all have various themes, not bound by any comminality. 

There has to be a theme. I get that they're short stories, but you can't just shove a bunch of words together and call it a book. That's ridiculous.

Summary: Short stories that broach many different genres - from humourist to philisophical. 

At this point I'm giving him props for spelling short and stories correctly. I see nothing humourist about it.

Target audience: litary readers

Hm. Since litary is not a thing, does that mean his target audience is no one?

Specific tone, themes, and mood you would like to convey to your readers: Tone and approve varry from piece to piece.

He spelled vary wrong. Seriously. That's more disturbing than the fact that this sentence makes no sense at all.

Who do you envision buying and reading your book: ?

To be fair, I assume this means the writer has realized that although he'd like litary readers to read his book, that's not likely to happen.

What sets your book apart: You tell me

I'm thinking you probably don't want me to tell you.

The fish?

So my awesome new book features this baffling conversation:

"So you bait your own hook?"

"Sure. After all, if one can't bait their hook and take the fish off then one can't legitimately say they fish."

"So you use night crawlers too?"

"Those aren't meant for fishing."

"Sure they are. The fish loves them. Don't tell me you're afraid of them?"

OK, first of all, I can't think of a better place to demonstrate when to use their inappropriately. One is undeniably singular. Their is plural. You cannot say one can't bait their hook or one can't say they fish. If you're going to use the singular one, you need to use he or she. In this case, it's a woman, so it should be if one can't bait her hook and one can't say she fishes. 

Second, your character is a linguist. She should know this. 

Third, this is ridiculously sexist. Yes, a single woman who goes fishing can bait her own hook. Stop being an ass.

And then we come to the really baffling part. The fish loves them. I can't even begin to comprehend why this is singular. I guess the only answer is that she is this girl: