Trans Pat (Possum/Rat) Girl that loves tabletop games and making things with my hands. I ran out of spoons like, 3 years ago and haven't gotten any back since. Learning how to properly girl, please be patient. I sometime post 18+ content.
Plural, but still She/Her pronouns please.
Hana, Aibou, Rose, Loop
∍⧽⧼∊
My Cashapp is cash.app/$TarotCard2

You can find me on PokefarmQ at this link!

https://pfq.link/TarotCard2

Creator of Cohost Radio! Tune in at the tag!


Tumblr(don’t post much)
www.tumblr.com/tarotcard2
warframe username (Friend me!)
TarotCard2#320
Neocities website( this links to the site profile.
neocities.org/site/tarotcard2

jkap
@jkap

bro why the fuck is mcdonald’s trying to lock me into a Binding Arbitration Agreement


cathoderaydude
@cathoderaydude

the thing about corporate behavior like this that i always think about is that every single one of them wanted to do this 200 years ago, they just thought it would look bad

and then about 20 years ago they all looked at each other and said "dare you to do it anyway" and when nobody noticed or cared, their corporate eyes became as large as dinner plates as the wool fell away

the only thing that ever kept them in check was the belief that we gave a shit. why they ever thought that is anyone's guess, but the lesson has been learned and now they all just do whatever their dark hearts desire. the floodgates are not only open, they have fallen off their hinges. the post-eula era is forever


76f0e4667ed32667d2bfc063699b246e
@76f0e4667ed32667d2bfc063699b246e
This page's posts are visible only to users who are logged in.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @jkap's post:

as someone who reads ToSes on sites when I'm bored I can say that most of them have binding arbitration provisions in them and have for many years. They're getting more and more common, but I suspect that McDonalds already had an Arbitration provision in their ToS. They're just being more upfront about it now than they used to be.

I think I remember reading something about either a ruling or a regulation somewhere (possibly California but I'm not sure) that suggested that the standard language was unenforceable because people don't actually read the ToS and so don't know they're agreeing to it. As a result, companies are trying to disclose this up front more clearly so that it will hold up in court. I can't find a source for that though (I did try though) so don't quote me on that.

in reply to @cathoderaydude's post:

in reply to @DecayWTF's post: