In NYC, small grocery stores (i.e. one of many retail storefronts on a block) are often colloquially referred to as bodegas, no matter the economic status of the area.
As a writer familiar with SF&F short fiction markets, I agree that more information is needed.
Including more biographical information on the website about yourself and any editors making acquisition decisions would help. You don't need to have industry cred already (though that helps), but writers like to know that (a) you're not a publisher/editor known not to pay, has a bad rep, etc. and (b) that you're a real person. It's also very helpful to know how long the magazine is funded for when it's not yet established -- so you have confidence that if you submit and are selected, it won't go under before you get paid.
Also, you should include what the publication format is, what specific rights you'd be buying, whether they're exclusive, etc. You say "first English publication rights" -- I'm assuming you mean exclusive First English Language serial rights? Print or digital? Or would it be nonexclusive? Are audio rights exclusive or nonexclusive? If you have a template contract you plan to use, you could link to it.
You have an expected response time, which is great; consider also including time to payment/publication. If you have formatting guidelines/preferences (i.e. standard manuscript format like Vonda McIntyre's), include those.
You can take a look at the guidelines/sites of established short fiction magazines to see what best practices are -- i.e. Asimov's, Clarkesworld, Analog, Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, Strange Horizons, Daily Science Fiction, etc.
Hope that helps! Always exciting to see more short fiction markets!
If your wife has been in caloric restriction for an extended period of time, she may have metabolic damage. I recently stumbled upon Layne Norton's work - he has a PhD in Nutritional Science and is a bodybuilder/powerlifter, and he makes some compelling arguments (and reviews of the literature) about how the metabolism responds to prolonged caloric restriction.
I think that's a very insightful point, and I agree.
As a side observation, I think you can actually make "fellow" in particular a bit more cool/casual, especially since it is a rather ambiguous term anyway and there are many kinds of fellows working on many levels out there. All it reliably seems to connote a learning environment, some degree of selectivity in participation, and less structure than a traditional school program.
It could be many things other than a lack of curious women in the population at large. Not saying any of these are true, obviously, but some possibilities: You have biases (conscious or unconscious) in the "type" of woman you befriend? Social signaling or dynamics in your conversations leading to not discussing curiosity-inspiring topics with women? You are not interested in the specific areas or things they are curious about? Etc.
I think that says more about the people you're hanging around with, rather than women in general. I know plenty who are genuinely curious about such things (and you can find a plethora in the news, university faculties, on message boards, etc.)
You would generally want to "change the ratio" of something if you felt there was untapped potential or interest that wasn't being expressed, often due to some systematic or structural barrier.
As an example, I can tell you, I go to a lot of startup events and they are often centered around activities like ping pong or beer drinking. I know many women interested in entrepreneurship and try to get them to go with me, but they tell me they don't like ping pong or would feel uncomfortable. And, at the events themselves, there are typically only one or two women who actually came.
Changing the ratio would involve creating an atmosphere that would encourage women who already have an interest to act on it and thus be better represented.
The other thing few people realize about personality assessments is that they are almost always RELATIVE, not ABSOLUTE, values.
Where you rank on any scale is a function of the population you're being compared to - so, for instance, if you take an assessment as an undergraduate, you may score lower in Extraversion or Openness compared to your peers (since studies show people tend to peak in those values at that time of life) as opposed to the general population. Practically speaking, your results from an assessment are often benchmarked against a group, but it's rare you know who that group is.
I think it was saying that if "happiness"="the pursuit of meaning" then "pursuit of happiness"="pursuit of the pursuit of meaning." Which is redundant.
I agree that both lists are important questions to ask, but as you allude to in your last sentence, it seems like it's asking for a great deal of self-awareness.
Most people are probably just not self-aware to be able to accurately answer those questions (from things like the mechanics of how a future event should occur all the way to "are our values/work styles aligned").
Do you, or anyone here, have suggestions for alleviating that?
I've definitely experienced this on the receiving end, both with startups and new products, but also with random mailing lists that only send out updates sporadically.
A good rule of thumb for ANY mass email communication is to lead with a short explanation of why they're receiving the email: "Thanks for signing up for updates from Newproduct, a new platform for knitters to connect online."
Remind them 1) they signed up, 2) what they signed up for (updates), and 3) who you are (descriptively).
I don't think the quote is advocating cutting out people who are going through a negative time, just those who are negative to YOU.
There's a difference between supporting someone through their difficulty and someone who is not supporting you, whether that means (consciously or unconsciously) belittling, undermining, or dismissing you or your ideas, or just not meshing well or productively with you.
More than just expecting to break your habit, I think the crucial piece is planning what you will do once you have.
The most dangerous moment in building a new habit is the moment when you realize that the best case scenario (aka sticking with the awesome new habit) is just not going to happen. For me, unless I have my Plan B ready to go, I tend to just revert to the status quo or worse (since I already failed, why not go all out). Having the Plan B - a glorified "if failure to complete Plan A, then do B" - already articulated lets me immediately move on to the next thing without beating myself up.
This was really helpful for me when I was getting going with a regular early morning jog. If I didn't get it in before work, plan B was a quick run after work before I drove home. The latter wasn't the habit I wanted to stick, but it helped me forgive myself the lapses until morning running became a habit.
In high school, I was lucky to have multiple teachers who were sticklers for imparting the essential building blocks of strong writing. We spent a lot of time "in the weeds," rote-learning vocabulary, sentence patterns, paragraph construction, and finally, structures for the expository essay (above and beyond the academic essay we mastered in school.)
The surprising thing, even to someone like me who considers herself a good writer to begin with, was how important working through each "level" of writing was. While I haven't reviewed the foundations in a long time (I probably should), because I spent so much time painstakingly memorizing the contents of each earlier on, I can now write quickly and confidently and usually be pretty close to correct.
3) Paragraph construction - Paragraphs and Essays (the part on paragraph construction and patterns is very straightforward, basic, and clear, I don't think it's worth buying the whole book though), http://www.amazon.com/Paragraphs-Essays-With-Integrated-Read...