Scanning tweets of my followers and the wall posts of my Facebook friends can be a pretty good gauge of what people are doing for fun.  It is also a great look at the dynamics, quirks and faux pas of  “dating 2.0″  relationships.

Shitty dates, no-show dates, cheapskate dates, text and twitter booty-calls, tweet-up hookups, and relationship status updates that change faster than Lindsey Lohan’s religion and sexual orientation.  People hook-up and break-up without putting down their cell-phones or  logging off of their Twitter or Facebook account.

Doesn’t this  pretty much sum up Generation Y relationships?   For much of my Baby Boomer dating  life we did not have cell phones or internet.  I had to ask for a home number.   I took the risk of nosy parents, brothers and sisters answering the phone.  Had to be on my game from minute one.  How did the world go on without Facebook, Sexting, Texting and Twitter?   God forbid we should actually have to look someone in the eye when asking them out or even worse, breaking up.

Now we are not even asking for phone numbers. We are asking for Facebook pages and Twitter user names.  When we do ask for a number we do not call, we text.  We are texting and tweeting our way to love and heartbreak. We are sending “Dear John Tweets” in 140 characters or less.

You would think the following text message exchange is right out of a Sex In The City episode.  It is a real life exchange between two people I tried to hook up on a blind date.  She lives in Manhattan and he is a very well known Hollywood actor.

The back story to this exchange is that Monica and Trent had been having a torrid “text and twitter  romance” but were  unsuccessful in trying to hook up for dinner.  They agreed to meet for a late coffee at Starbucks in Mid-Town.

Monica arrives on time but Trent is running late.  Monica is waiting anxiously in anticipation of their first Starbucks meet.  Trent finally texts her (some texts have been combined to save space).

(Trent)   Give me Ten Minutes

(Monica) So, I gave you 20 mins. Haven’t heard from you. Guess your not going to show, good night.

(Trent) I’m in a cab NOW heading to the financial district just tell me the cross streets.

(Monica) You are too late, going home.

(Trent) OK but lets discuss it further when I get there.

(Monica) No. I am meeting a friend for a bite. Sorry. You should have communicated better. Next time.

(Trent) I ‘m almost there, I’ll join you and u’r friend, in fact I’ll buy you both dinner:o)

(Monica) No thank you

(Trent) Great! Which restaurant are we meeting at?

(Monica) Trent, I don’t need your charity.  I need you to be on time. You missed that window and I have made other plans.  We will have to get together another time.

(Trent) I took a cab all the way down here. It cost me a fortune.  Can you recommend a nice restaurant I can have a meal at by myself?  With all due respect there will not be another time.

(Monica) You are being ridiculous. You were 45 minutes late and I made plans.  Its your own fault. Don’t take it out on me!  Plus we were supposed to meet in  your neighborhood not mine.

(Monica)  If anything you should have apologized.  I have had one hell of a day and do not deserve to be treated that  way!

(Trent)  Ur nuts. If we were going to meet in my neighborhood you would hadda traveled up here it would have taken at least a half hour,

(Trent) i was coming to u to make it easy.  now I’m walking all  the way back from wall street I’m at canal, again no disrespect , and in an apologetic tone, LOSE MY NUMBER!

(Trent)  I left my wallet at my meeting and I used all my cash for the cab

(Monica) We talked about me coming to you. I am sorry you left your wallet at the restaurant. I’m not sure how all this is my fault. Why are you being so nasty to me?

(Monica) I didn’t do anything to you. Do you need me to bring you some money?  I’m no sure what you want me to do here.

(Monica)  By the way, if you don’t have your wallet how were you planning on buying my friend and me dinner? You’re a liar and a pig

(Trent) I’m not being nasty, just straightforward.  I thought it would be better for u and considerate of me to come meet you downtown.

(Trent) Anyway, I’ve taken off my coat and tie, rolled up my suit  jacket  and am going to try to panhandle-i’m at the union sq. park. I just need to raise 2 bux for the train

(Trent) This is embarrassing.  I hope ur satisfied!

(Trent) No.  Please don’t bring any money. I’ve already gotten 30 cents-i’ll raise two bux in less than 20 minutes but thank for the gesture. )

(Monica)  Your choice.  Stay away from the crack dealers.

(Trent) I need to put the Blackberry away or else they’ll think I as at one of those giant evil banks, and they won’t pity me.-they’ll spit on me! So I can’t continue to communicate with u…..

(Trent) No hard feelings-just not meant to be.

Love found, lost, texted and tweeted  without ever dialing a digit.   The epitome of a Dating 2.0 world.  We are advertising to the entire social networking world that we are on the market in 140 characters or less.

We used to break up in restaurants so there would not be a scene.  Now we find out  we are newly single for the first time when we see our “significant other’s” Facebook relationship status suddenly set to “single and looking”  You  try to text her and her phone number has been changed.  You try to contact her on Facebook and find you are now “blocked”. You are also blocked and “un-followed” on Twitter.  A total dating 2.0 disconnect.

In my day, if you met a girl in a bar and she thought you were a  total douchebag, the  number she gave you was actually the Rejection Hotline or Dominos Pizza.(I ate a lot of pizza)

It will not be long before we will be creating our twitter networks for the sole purpose of finding a mate.  We will see tweets like ads we now see on billboard or the billboards themselves will tweet our message to the local masses.

“30k Millionaire Tweetgeek” user name bcuban seeks SATM(Single Attractive Tweet Mate).  Tweet me your vitals and lets Tweetup!”

Any takers?

©2009 Brian Cuban

Enjoy this piece?  Be sure to join the Cuban Revolution Fan Club and/or subscribe to my newsletter to stay abreast of future posts and live celebrity interviews on The Revolution Rant

I was once a loyal customer of Diningin.com.  It is a restaurant delivery service in Dallas and several other major cities.  You can order online through their portal from variety of restaurants for a moderate delivery charge.

As someone who eats out 90 percent of the time, I was a regular user of their service. I used it on an average of 2 times a month. My order history shows that since January 1, 2009, I used the service 12 times.  For me, it  it was a great deal.  The 7  dollar(rounded) delivery charge was worth it to be able to order out without the hassle of going out.

It was a great deal until they recently raised their minimum delivery order from 15 to 25 dollars.  It then transitioned from a decent restaurant delivery service with an good selection of restaurants to an over-priced, sometimes flawed, delivery service with a limited selection of restaurants.  At 15 dollars, I was willing to tolerate some delayed delivery and miss-filled orders.  At 25 dollars I want exactly what I would get if I sat down at the restaurant.  Diningin.com does not always deliver on that and if they make a mistake it is a hassle to correct once the food has left the source.

A 15 dollar price point allows you do order for one.  It allows you to consider a wide variety of any of the available  menu selections.  At 25 dollar plus delivery fee you are forced to order for two.  It forces you to limit your selection of items to reach that price point.  It will ultimately hurt their quick-casual restaurants.  Those that have primarily lower-mid-priced items on their menu.  Items on the menu that were once big sellers at a lower cost will  be bypassed just so a person can make the minimum order price.   What’s more, if I am now forced to spend 50 dollars with service charge and tip to use the service, I would rather sit down somewhere to ensure good service and accurate food delivery.  That’s a weekend night at a pretty good restaurant for a lot of people

One would think that such a drastic required minimum expenditure increase would spell corporate death in this terrible economy.   I suspect that Diningin.com was losing money on the individual consumer orders so they decided to price those out of the business model and focus on catering and corporate.  It may be a no-win scenario.  Consumers are not the only ones cutting back.  Corporations are also eliminating these types of discretionary expenditures. Someone there must have crunched the numbers and decided that this was the only way to go in a survival mode.

It is also possible that Diningin.com looked at the numbers and decided that I was not the type of customer they could support anymore.   The single guy coming in around the minimum with each order.  Maybe guys like me were sucking the life out of their profitable higher dollar revenue.  It is also possible that their numbers demontrated most orders as being closer to 25 than 15 regardless.  If that’s true, maybe their decision to eliminate my business was a good one.  Bean counters do not always take the perception versus reality factor into account.  Either way  Diningin.com will never see my business again.  I hope somebody steps in to fill the void.

My girlfriend and I were eating dinner at a local Dallas restaurant that doubles a a look and be seen venue of local elite, elite wannabes and 30k millionaires. Translation?  You never know who is going to walk through the door.

As we were chit-chatting and enjoying the visual entertainment, a guy I know entered and walked up to the bar.  He was one of those guys or girls who over the years, you see repeatedly as you and your fixed clique of single, once single and single again acquaintances move through life in a often fluctuating but never really changing mate and date scene.

He was very good looking guy that always had a very good looking women on his arm.  They however, were always the same women.  Not the same in re-hooking up with a previous flame.  The same in that he always seemed to be with a women from the same rotating fixed menu choices that I had seen out on the Dallas scene for the last 10 years.

That night was no exception. In lockstep behind him was  a very attractive women who had also been part of the Dallas “out and about” scene for the last 10 years.  I turned to my girlfriend and said:

“That makes perfect sense that they are together”

She inquired as to why.  “It makes sense because they are both into group sex”

She was flabbergasted and immediately suspicious.   “How would you know they are into group sex!!”

“Because they run in a group that no matter how many years go by, at one point or another, everyone in the group has dated or slept with everyone else in the group.  Group Sex!!

My girlfriend was  relieved at my explanation and returned to her normal skin color.

About three months later I saw the same guy again at a Dallas Mavericks game.  He was with, you guessed it, another group sex girl!

What is it about this “group sex” phenomenon.  Ten or Fifteen years will go by and the dating clique will move right along with it, fluctuating only as people get married, divorced, date and dumped.  Always coming back to the flock like pigeons to a homing beacon.

Any explanations out there?

Michael Vick  was released from a federal prison in Leavenworth, Kansas.  He will serve the last two months of his 23-month sentence in home confinement at his Virginia residence.  It is being reported that Vick will work with the Humane Society of the United States on anti-dogfighting campaigns.

It is a given that at some point Vick will seek to re-enter the NFL.  It has been reported that he could return to professional football as soon as September if reinstated by the NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.  There will be opposition from animal rights groups and animal lovers in general.  I count myself among the animal lovers. Many would even consider me a “radical” animal lover. I am both anti-hunting and horse racing.  Do not however, count me among the opposition to Michael Vick being allowed to again play professional football.

When the time comes, should Roger Goodell find that Vick is in compliance with internal NFL conduct guidelines,  I believe he  should re-instate Vick’s eligibility to play and seek NFL employment under whatever probationary terms he deems appropriate.

Anyone who knows me is probably shocked as hell to read this. I have been active in various animal rights causes and benefits.  I screamed loudest for Vick’s head on a doggie platter and a long prison sentence. I was disappointed when his state sentence ran concurrent with his federal sentence although as an attorney I was expecting just that.

I also do not like Michael Vick.  I think he is a gangster thug.  I admit that I have never met him.  It does not matter.   In my mind it is res ipsa loquitur.  If you abuse animals or take pleasure from watching them abused that is all I need to know.  You are a bad person and a gangster thug.  End of story.

I also believe Michael Vick will  again end up in trouble with the law.  Why?  I believe that anyone who abuses animals or takes pleasure in watching them abused has on a certain level, a sociopath personality.  That person lacks the mental mechanism to understand societal values.  This  moral disconnect will more often than not lead to long term trouble.  You can’t grow a conscience regardless of any explanation for not having one.

With all that being said how could I possibly support Michael Vick?

I support Micheal Vick being allowed to seek employment in the NFL because I respect our justice system and the equality of judgment it is supposed to represent, even if it often does not always work out that way.  Michel Vick was judged.  He is paying his debt born out of that judgment.  Once that happens, our Constitution and justice system mandates that while we can hold opinions, express them and judge him as a person, we can no longer legally judge his act.

I am comfortable enough in my convictions in this area to know that I would never hire someone who did what he did to work for me in any capacity.  You have the right to ask me for a job.  I have the right to say no.  I have the right to bring my moral compass into play in saying no.  You have the right to find someone else to hire you in the same type of job who may view things differently than I do.

Michael Vick is paying his dues to society.  He should not have to pay them again in being denied the right to seek employment.  I know there will be an NFL owner or two who does not view Michael Vick the same way I do. The NFL is too competitive and the margin of error too small.  A team will give him a chance.  I won’t like it.  I however am not society’s moral gatekeeper.  The NFL and individual team owners will decide which way their own compass points.

I will say that whoever hires Michael Vick had better hope that somewhere deep inside himself  he has found the guilt ridden emotions that help shape the human conscience.  If he has not, it is a given that  he will be judged again.