While that is true this one is a pretty common issue, there are a lot of people that don't seem to be able to be keep their opinions about having kids to themselves even after being told by someone they don't want kids. My partner and I don't want kids and have both heard the "you'll change your mind" etc etc many, many times from many different people from both close friends and family and acquaintances. And when we say no we don't want kids we often still get condescending responses like people know ourselves better than we do.

My partner gets the worst of it since she's the one that would actually be having them. I feel like this one is a proper LPT, a lot of people out there need to hear it.

A contract is not allowed to violate the law but companies have you sign illegal contracts all the time, they are counting on you not calling them on it.

If you read the article it just said the type of contract was a "clickwrap" and that the judge said it was "unenforceable" but it never says for what reason. I would wager the contract had an illegal clause in it and that's what the judge took issue with, not that it was a click to agree style contract in of itself. For instance if the contract essentially says we can charge you for a service we never provide that could violate consumer protection laws or just be considered outright fraud.

The $74 was probably the fee to file and in small claims court you don't need a lawyer and judges generally give you pretty wide latitude. Show up on time, be polite and bring your evidence and you're pretty much good to go and have a good shot of winning if someone ripped you off. So it could be that was all they were out for court costs.

What killed them in Canada was that not only did they not have a strong clothing section that the US stores were apparently known for their logistics and ordering system was so bad that they would constantly run out of basic items. And I'm not like talking you go and they don't have the exact brand of kitty litter you'd usually but there is zero kitty litter in the entire store. Apply that to almost anything in the store, you couldn't really count on them to have what you needed. I have never seen a large chain run out of things on such a constant basis as Target in Canada did, it was bizarre.

After that happened a few times with several different things over the course of a few months I just stopped going there, I would assume other people had similar experiences. I was not surprised in the least when they ended up closing.

Yes, it was also very nice of him to make sure so many brand names were turned towards the camera and not a single item is disturbed in the display at the checkout either. And of course no one is looking at the guy with a camera standing on top of ladder or something. It's almost like it was staged...

I like how 9 and 10 are essentially saying you should try and be nice even if the person is an asshole but there are limits. Some people are just psychos and will never stop fucking with you no matter what because that's what they enjoy doing, don't bother trying to be nice to those people, it won't make any difference.

Very, very true.

Thanks, edited.

> Your old name is just for her to use, in intimate situations

She already said it's fine if her girlfriend uses it at home but she is still using it at industry events and during interviews. I'm not sure trying to wrap the exact same suggestion in some more flowery language is going make any difference.

OP offered that solution and she didn't want to do it and is now sabotaging her professionally. I would have trouble getting used to it to but it doesn't seem like she is willing to do it. It seems like your suggestion has already been tried and failed.

Edit: typo

And that "who you know" doesn't even mean that person has to be some heavyweight in the industry. There are lots of stories of actors who made it because they had family or friends that worked on lighting, set design, as production assistants and so on and that was enough to get them the audition that gave them their break. Sure they still had to earn the role but without that connection they probably don't even get in front of the people who make the casting decisions.

You must have been in a rich school district, in 84 around where I grew up you'd still be using 16 mm film projectors for the most part. The VCR/TV cart set up only mostly replaced film by 1990 and even then I can still remember watching a few films in the early 90's. The film of a woman giving birth we watched in health class was infamous as it did not shy away from showing what having a baby really looked like.

Yes, NASA has put so much of their material from that time online that you could probably find all of these for free and at high resolution. The article keeps referring to "vintage prints" so it might mean actual prints from that time and while they could have historic value printed photos love to degrade over time. Especially color ones from decades ago can fade a lot. One of the examples look like it was signed, obviously depending who that was could add value.

Long story short it's a shit article and who knows what they're actually selling. If it's just prints of old photos made today it's a rip off, if it's prints from decades ago maybe signed they might have more value but don't expect them to look all that great and they'll probably get worse in the future.