It's been ages since the last time I posted something. Lots of things have happened in my life in the meantime, lots of changes. I've left my single daily life behind, I've moved to a new, bigger flat, I've taken important lifetime decisions...
But as far as is blog is concerned, now I've got a proper sewing room (and a new sewing machine). That's one of the things I like most about the flat.
And all this changes also mean that I'm back to my sewing and eager to learn new things, techniques, experiment with new bags. This weekend I sewed a bag after four months, and although the heat in Madrid is not very inspiring, I really want to go back to the habit of sewing a bit every day. It helps me forget about daily stress, it brings me to a different world were I don't need to look for mistakes and spot errors. We editors are really sick.
Q. How many writers does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A. Ten. One to change it; nine to think they could have done it better.
Q: How many writers does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: But why do we have to change it?
Q. How many editors does it take to change a lightbulb?
A. Only one; but first they have to rewire the entire building.
Q: How many editors does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: I can't tell whether you mean "change a lightbulb" or "have sex in a lightbulb." Can we reword it to remove ambiguity?
Q: If you want to change a lightbulb, how many editors do you need?
A: This question does not conform to our documentation model.
Q: How many senior editors does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: You were supposed to have changed that lightbulb last week!
Q. How many copy editors does it take to change a lightbulb?
A. The last time this question was asked, it involved senior editors. Is the difference intentional? Should one or the other instance be changed? It seems inconsistent.
Q: How many copy editors does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Copy editors aren't supposed to change lightbulbs. They should just query them.