The dumbest thing that actually worked? I joined Tinder. Reason I say it was the dumbest is because I still acknowledge that it’s not my kind of dating scene even though I ended up meeting the love of my life through the app. Other than that? Nothing was wrong or dumb. I have done nothing much because the man I am currently dating sent me a superlike after I was on the app for less than 12 hours. I joined, created profile, went through possible matches, and then went to bed. I didn’t have enough time to do something dumb. Now my boyfriend on the other hand was on the app for 4–5 months prior to me joining and him finding me. His story is that he had been in there long enough to end up matching with some bots (robots that somehow end up joining or hacking the app. I have not a clue how) that he would have conversations with to test if they were legitimate people. He would also match with different people who would either immediately block him because he came as weird or he would block them because they came off as weird. When he found me, what he saw in my profile was that I was local, I was a legitimate person because I knew someone that he knew through Facebook, and I had multiple pictures of myself that looked genuine. I also had a description where I stated my intention for using the app which was that I was looking for a serious relationship. What he did after I connected with him was talk to me and then test me as the conversation progressed. How did he test me? He told a corny joke which I laughed to. If I hadn’t have found his joke funny, he probably wouldn’t have asked me out on a date. I hope that answers your question. I know it wasn’t very…. eventful. Question: After they talked on Tinder the couple probably what? Options: - not enough information   - Didn't end up meeting.   - Only talked through Tinder.   - Met in person. === The correct answer is
Met in person.

SEOUL — The U.S. has indicated it is prepared to open the North Korean economy to significant private investment, if a nuclear deal can be reached. But even if economic restrictions were lifted, the restrictive and repressive state would likely still present a challenging environment for foreign investment. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Sunday that if North Korean leader Kim Jong Un complies with what President Donald Trump has demanded, the complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of North Korea, the United States would offer foreign investment “in spades” to build up the country’s infrastructure and develop its economy. “This will be Americans coming in, private sector Americans, not the U.S. taxpayer, private sector Americans coming in to help build out the energy grid. They need enormous amounts of electricity in North Korea; to work with them to develop infrastructure, all the things that the North Korean people need, the capacity for American agriculture to support North Korea, so they can eat meat and have healthy lives,” said Pompeo during an interview on the Fox News Sunday program. The Secretary of State recently returned from a trip to Pyongyang, where he meet with the North Korean leader to prepare for the upcoming Trump-Kim summit that will be held in Singapore on June 12. North Korea also released three American prisoners to Pompeo as a humanitarian gesture in advance of the summit. The Trump administration is increasingly optimistic it can work out an agreement to dismantle the North’s nuclear program, its advanced ballistic missile arsenal, and chemical weapons capabilities, so as to no longer threaten the U.S. or it is allies. During the recent North-South summit, Kim committed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and indicated that he seeks an end to the severe U.S.-led sanctions banning 90 percent of North Korean trade that were imposed for his country’s repeated nuclear and missile tests. “They obviously want to make concessions, a lot of... Question: Why did Kim commit to denuclearize North Korea? Options: - To hold the North-South summit   - To hold the Trump-Kim summit   - not enough information   - To end U.S.- led sanctions === The correct answer is
To end U.S.- led sanctions

As the United States consults with allies about a possible military response to a suspected chemical weapons attack in Syria, Russia said Wednesday that all parties involved should refrain from actions that could destabilize the fragile situation in the region. Russia is an ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and has fought in support of his government in the conflict since 2015. The United States has backed rebel groups in Syria and blames Assad's forces for the attack in eastern Ghouta on Saturday that killed at least 40 people. Both Syria and Russia have denied the allegations. U.S. President Donald Trump has warned those responsible will pay a "big price," and he has spoken repeatedly with his British and French counterparts about a possible response to the attack. "We are looking for a coordinated response, whatever that response might be," State Department spokesman Heather Nauert said Tuesday. French President Emmanuel Macron said a decision would be made "in the coming days," and that any airstrikes would target the Syrian government's chemical facilities. Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop added her country's support Wednesday for any action that is "targeted, calibrated and proportionate." In addition to blaming Syria, Trump has further blamed Assad's backers in Iran and Russia for the eastern Ghouta attack. A global chemical weapons watchdog on Tuesday said it will send a team to investigate the incident.   The World Health Organization said Wednesday that according to reports from its partners, 500 people who sought treatment Saturday showed signs and symptoms of toxic chemical exposure. The WHO expressed outrage at the suspected use of chemical weapons and demanded immediate access to the area to provide care. At the U.N. Security Council on Tuesday, Russia vetoed a U.S.-drafted plan that would have set up a commission to investigate and assign blame for the chemical weapons attack.  The World Health Organization said Wednesday that according to reports from its partners, 500 people... Question: What did Trump think of the gas attack? Options: - It was supported by Iran   - It was wrong   - not enough information   - It was unjust === The correct answer is
not enough information

I normally do not post certain types of things on my blog or on social media, like political messages, but today I feel compelled. I’ve been thinking for the last few days about the most recent school shooting in Parkland, and my overwhelming emotion right after grief is rage. I am so angry it makes me cry and for those of you out there who know me, angry-cry is the end-stage, top-of-the-gauge level of angry for me. I am angry that as a nation, we continue to wring our hands and bemoan each mass shooting but we don’t take any action to stop the next one. I am angry that our elected officials have failed us in the most spectacular way possible by being unable to work together or to set aside special interests to protect the lives and safety of Americans, including our most vulnerable citizens, our children. I am angry that time and time again, we the people and our elected officials weigh the value of human lives against countless other things (Second Amendment, special interests, party disagreements, inertia, whatever) and the value of human life comes up short in the calculations. I am angry at myself for believing at any point in the last several years that I could trust lawmakers to address this epidemic and I am angry at myself for feeling so helpless that I have not personally taken action. This stops now. I am angry that in 2012, 20 6-7 year old children and 6 adults were murdered in Sandy Hook and in the 5+ years since, we have done nothing meaningful to stop this. To me, this is tantamount to saying that we as a nation are OK with this. I don’t think we are, but that’s the message we’re sending if we don’t force our government to do something. According to the New York Times, there have been 239 school shootings nationwide since Sandy Hook with 438 people shot, 138 who died. Question: According to the text, where did the most recent shooting take place? Options: - The New York Times.   - not enough information   - Parkland.   - Sandy Hook. === The correct answer is

Parkland.