Surprising Story Receptions

It had been changed to make sense, after I linked it.

1 Like

Given the comments made since the change, I’d say the words “make sense” are doing a lot of heavy lifting.


This story, the comments are an oddly unanimous “That sounds like an interesting and normal logo”


Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait Wait hold on

Rewind the tape

The OUTSIDE of the house!?

The very few comments outside the consensus appear to be assuming that the client wants a realistic lobster because they don’t want it to look too cartoonish.

1 Like

This story was already deleted when I went back for the link, perhaps someone could find an archive of it.

It featured the OP and the rest of their class laughing because someone asked if infertility is hereditary. Most of the comments were annoyed because it’s a perfectly valid question - yes, incomplete infertility can be hereditary, and complete infertility can be treated and then inherited - as well as because it’s pretty rude to laugh at someone for asking a question, and the editors even included the “stupid” tag.


Only a few comments so far but I have a feeling that this won’t go the way OP has planned.
And I’d say that the other kid is not part of the playground and not something to step on.


That is embarrassing coming from Hawaii and I commented as such.

Here’s another new one that is not going to go well:


It is definitely not going well! Not for OP, anyway.

did anyone miss the fact that Op’s mother was going to (illegally) keep the “Safety” deposit the last renters paid for herself instead of returning it to the renters? Sure “during the wrong thing for the right reasons is still the wrong thing” - but since Op is a teen (or I am assuming) - they might not know how to call in her Mom being a slumlord.

And I don’t like how people think that Op’s materneal and Paterneal sides screwed over her inheritence from the Materneal/paterneal grandparents. I don’t think it has anything to do with her being a brat… but they thought the other side of the family was going to “give” property/land to OP.

Beside don’t we remember a story on here where OP’s has a nasty aunt and uncle who even tried to break down the OP’s parents’ door- when Op was house-sitting but had been “sweet” on OP when she was younger?

Oh, I didn’t miss it. But that makes what OP did worse.

OP responded to their sleazy mother threatening to illegally withhold the deposit by destroying the property. Why? So the mother had to waste her ill-gotten money. This solves nothing and helps no one. The better solution would have been to alert the proper authorities.

Yes, OP and their mother are family, but if I found out my family was pulling that stunt I’d report it in a heartbeat. Not doing so makes ME liable, and there’s no way in h*ll I’m going down with them.


OP is still a teenager under 17 (or so I assume) which is why they’re still co-owning property they’re will have one day. Teenagers don’t even know how to fight aganist bad bosses… And they might want to fight aganist the only adult relative in their life because all the others are just as the greedy as OP’s mom which is why they got screwed over in the first place

Unfortunately being a teenager is not an excuse. If they don’t report illegal behavior, the law considers them liable.

They can’t be sued directly, but they will still be named as a defendant. Furthermore, what they did is stlll vandalism–since they are not the sole owner of the property, they can be held criminally responsible for what they did.

After all, the property is at least partly their mother’s, and that means OP must respect her legal interests in it.

Edit: Also, co-owning a property/business with the idea that you’ll own it one day is not an age thing. That’s a partnership, which is a type of business. In a partnership, a partner who retires typically transfers their share of the business to someone else. Transferring it to the other partner(s) is not only not unheard of, it’s relatively common and often planned well in advance.

In fact, co-owning real estate with a minor is ill-advised. For one thing, it makes it difficult to sell or transfer said property, because minors are not allowed to do that. Yes. this includes renting.


Why do you think the OP is a teenager? I reread the story and nothing in it gives the indication of that. There are plenty of non-teenage people who do stupid, immature stuff. OP is childish, but not necessarily a child.

Edited to add: And no, I didn’t miss that OP’s mom was going to keep the deposit that should have been returned. That fact doesn’t absolve OP of their own terrible behavior.


Yeah. It’s basically revenge for the sake of revenge. Revenge is only a good thing when it’s constructive, like if it taught the mom a lesson or if it got the renter back their money. Wasting the mom’s money like this not only doesn’t teach her anything, but it actually prevents the mom from giving the money back if she ever learns her lesson. This is just destructive.


I think OP is a teenger because they;re not helping a lot with the Mom’s properties even though they’re co-owner of the properties. The only reason for that to happen is if they’re minor. (13-17). If they were an adult-they would have more responsbility in dealing with properties

Try telling that to literally any major renting company. They either tend to employ local managers, do jack themselves and watch the money roll in, or just as often, hire third party management companies to do the work for them.

There’s also this thing called a “silent partner,” which is pretty common. A silent partner doesn’t actually do any work–they simply collect a share of the income. Their only contribution is an initial capital investment at the start of a business.

And again, minors can’t legally transfer property or form contracts, which makes OP being a minor unlikely.

Edit: this conversation is outside the scope of this thread, so I’m bowing out. I shouldn’t even be arguing with you here. And yet here I am, doing it again.


OP’s mother withheld the deposit, sure.

And how did OP vandalising the place help?

  • OP’s mother has no idea who vandalised the place, or why. There is no connection to the deposit being withheld. If anything, OP’s mother is now more likely to hold onto future deposits to pay for this sort of expense.
  • The renter still hasn’t got their deposit back.
  • The renter may get blamed for the damage, making future renting harder for them,

OP just pointlessly made a bad situation worse.


by vandalizing the place the Mom couldn’t hog the depost anymore. And Op’s Mom didn’t blame OP or the renters for it but “some random teens in the neighbourhood”