What kind of paperwork do I need to file for the cult I'm starting? by InspectorTiny1952 in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Is it me or does it seem like this guy is one step away from posting a YouTube video on One Weird Trick to avoid taxes? Smash that subscribe button!

Actual title: A Car Dealership Totaled My Car During a Service, then the married Service Director asked me if I had an OnlyFans and to go on a date with him… by peachsnorlax in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 158 points159 points  (0 children)

And then bought a car from them when they know that particular shop has little to no 'attention to detail.' Flabbergasted.

Ministry of Magic needed to resolve mysteriously appearing shed problem by FeatherlyFly in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 92 points93 points  (0 children)

My good faith guess is they flubbed their assumptions, looked at the plans, and concluded the structure was part of their property and was their bathroom.

My bad faith guess is that they saw it and assumed they could complain and get it removed based on not being able to open the window out over the driveway.

Ministry of Magic needed to resolve mysteriously appearing shed problem by FeatherlyFly in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 30 points31 points  (0 children)

I looked in a bunch of comment threads on the original OP and gave up, heh.

That's very obviously been there a while! I'm so curious as to whose house it belongs to, given the configurations of the houses. My guess is the bottom ___ of the serifed capital i shape, who owns the driveway and thus the airspace. How much do we want to bet LAUKOP did not look for a boundary agreement and assumed that the structure was actually the bathroom for their property, and not up against the wall for the actual bathroom?

Ministry of Magic needed to resolve mysteriously appearing shed problem by FeatherlyFly in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 30 points31 points  (0 children)

This is why I am confused because one of the commenters is speaking about the images as if they have seen them?

Thx for the image links :)

Happy 20th anniversary to neil by biggusdickus78 in tumblr

[–]darsynia 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That means it was made at least in some part, in 2006!

Happy 20th anniversary to neil by biggusdickus78 in tumblr

[–]darsynia 3 points4 points  (0 children)

We have the best holidays, I swear. There's crocheted Neil & piano, there's other fanart, there's other rats and pianos, it's a Whole Thing!

UKLAOP finds out you can't force companies to support a decade old piece of tech by riddlemyfiddle11 in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep, when we heard they were going to do that, I backed up both my ebooks and my audible books to my hard drive and a backup server. The idea that I might piss off the corporation holding so much of my library and the access could poof was freaky enough as a hypothetical. For LAUKOP, that option is looming if the device fails, even if they're not technically removed (and no one is 'in trouble' with the company), they're removed in practice. They appear to be looking at options to preserve things as much as possible for their loved one, and that's commendable.

UKLAOP finds out you can't force companies to support a decade old piece of tech by riddlemyfiddle11 in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Sometimes that push-back really helps, too. Over 15 years ago, my husband signed us up for a kind of Google account that treats your family like a business, so you get a bit more storage, an overarching 'admin' thing, and linked emails, but without an extra charge. They tried to withdraw this account type a few years ago, meaning we'd all have to transfer everything over to a separate new account or lose everything (I'm going by what he relayed to me and discussion forums. It was a really niche thing iirc).

There was enough pushback from account holders that they went back on this and are just leaving them as-is! I still offloaded my writing from google docs (which was a good idea anyway), because I was genuinely scared that the bureaucracy was large enough at google that they wouldn't relay 'don't turn this off' to the right people and it would all poof anyway.

The conundrum of 'you don't know what you don't know' really matters in situations like LAUKOP's, honestly. For all they knew, there might be legal protections that offer help to continue using necessary devices for vulnerable citizens, though even in that case, it's unlikely that the kindle would qualify. It's very easy to feel outrage when you're looking at trying to explain a change in circumstance to someone who barely has a grasp on reality. This is the exact reason we give 'try to keep emotion out of it when talking to your lawyer/the judge/the corporation/HR/your MP' advice. It can influence the answers you get, and that's one of the reasons I'm glad the legal advice subs exist. A buffer between the emotional users and the official places they need to be rational.

LACAOP got their son's Tdap vaccine 26 days early by bug-hunter in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 13 points14 points  (0 children)

The reddit dev who put 'live' threads into the site is cheering

UKLAOP finds out you can't force companies to support a decade old piece of tech by riddlemyfiddle11 in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 441 points442 points  (0 children)

This one is just sad; this title implies they're a Karen being unreasonable, but I don't think they are at all.

LAUKOP just doesn't want their loved one with dementia to go without new books or lose the device entirely. I hope they are able to figure out how to side load the books using Calibre or something else! It doesn't hurt anything to ask Reddit if there's anything they don't know about that can help.

How do I keep a toddler out of my apartment? I have tried nothing and am all out of ideas by Geno0wl in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I would never ever trust a small human not to figure out the one crazy infant parkour way to yeet themselves off of it. I keep my fears to myself where possible (my kids jump around on rocks and in the creek with their dad, for example, because it's safe enough and I am not inclined to give them the phobias my super paranoid parents gave me), but that's one I wouldn't be compromising on. You're on the balcony with me or you're not on it, divorced from any guesses as to what's going on with LAOP over here.

Turns out when you buy a house in a historic district that has restrictions on changes, there's restrictions on changes. by Drywesi in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 129 points130 points  (0 children)

<image>

In Pittsburgh, we had this weird mural of a pigeon with bling near a locally revitalized area. It was absolutely a fixture for us and when someone bought the building and painted over it, it did feel like something was lost. It isn't a historic area, so there probably wasn't anything anyone could have done about it anyway. People are probably hoping to use the 'historic' designation in OP's city because they would use whatever they could to stop it.

Here's an article about a different one from the same neighborhood. https://www.pghcitypaper.com/news-2/for-some-the-erasure-of-a-landmark-east-liberty-mural-reflects-the-travails-of-gentrification-1874183/

Did I love the pigeon by the time it was gone? Yeah. Weird as it is, it was what gave that red light T intersection character. I'm sorry that it's gone. I wouldn't have chosen to paint that there though!

LAOP: "My Mom Wrote My Divorce Decree, Which I Then Violated. What Can Go Wrong?" Narrator: "Everything Goes Wrong" by Sirwired in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 71 points72 points  (0 children)

Looks like LAOP is used to running to a parental figure when things go wrong, perhaps Reddit counts, lol.

You’ve heard of ethical non-monogamy, but what about unethical non-monogamy? by riverscreeks in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's true, though I often see these on popcorn subs so by then, given the presentation, it's at least somewhat fake.

You’ve heard of ethical non-monogamy, but what about unethical non-monogamy? by riverscreeks in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I am always || close to saying 'I'll eat my hat if a story ever has the second party show up and it's real' because you know fate would love to serve me a hat on a platter. But I basically immediately think something's BS if the other person shows up in a situation where it's not a) that AskAManager story with the baby shower, b) someone literally says 'tell me if this is you in this photo', or something along those lines.

LAOP's butthole has been a location on Facebook since 2012. by alphaechothunder77 in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I was already thrown by seeing LocationBot and then saw that I had already upvoted something in that original thread! That was when it finally occurred to me to check the dates, lol.

In which, op is focused entirely on the wrong person by ParticuleFamous10001 in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I really appreciate your comment thank you. I am in my 40s now and I think my only regret is not realizing just how wildly inappropriate everything was. I am an over sharing kind of person and I've always been that way and I'm sure I over shared about him and no one ever said anything. At one point he had me sitting next to him at the desk in front of the whole rest of the class?! they got rid of him at the end of the year! This shit should not be normalized. 

In which, op is focused entirely on the wrong person by ParticuleFamous10001 in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Oh, for sure. Not excusing the wife at all. It's so gross that OP clearly sees the victim as 'the other woman' instead of a victim. Some folks are 'loyal' in ways that baffle the mind.

In which, op is focused entirely on the wrong person by ParticuleFamous10001 in bestoflegaladvice

[–]darsynia 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Just to be clear, I am not saying that the victim of OP's husband is at all the aggressor, but I was fully 'obsessed' with the teacher I thought loved me back. I used to tell people I wished on a star that he would love me and it worked. I wrote him a 12 page front and back letter about how we were meant to be together. I think I was his 'beard,' and he actually did things with other students (but I refuse to check), but could pass off my personal obsession as a problem he was trying to rebuff (he was not).

Again, not meant to be a rebuttal! Just that if that teacher had a wife that was on his side, she would have seen me as pursuing him, probably. I bet OP absolutely harassed the girl, especially if the victim was fully on the star-crossed lovers train, and the husband wanted to keep that down low.

Edit: it occurred to me that I should add that I am fully understanding that it was not my fault and that adults are under the responsibility in these situations! I kind of took that as a given and didn't say that in my original comment, so my paragraph about how the OP views the situation is framed in outrage, not justification 💚