Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.
I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!
It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
7. Content should match the theme of this community.
-Content should be Mildly infuriating.
-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.
...
8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.
-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.
...
...
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.
Isn't that an illegally forced agreement? I mean, the consumer already bought the product and is forced to enter an agreement after the fact? At least it feels like it would be illegal.
It's the same with software, sure, but somehow I've been brainwashed into thinking it's ok because it's a digital product/I only agree to a license of said product.
By reading this comment, you agree to be bound eternally in thrall to me, and wear a maid dress for my amusement.
Jokes on you I'm into that shit
What is it?
Delevoping liver issues, that's what it is.
aka Protein powder
a kidney or other superfluous organs. mmm fruity
Time to use the box cutter and open it from the bottom.
Ah! that one of the worst parts of the internet, and they've figured out a way to make it real.
At least they mention the arbitration upfront, I guess.
Mandatory arbitration agreement for a protein shake or whatever it is. First it may not be enforceable. Second it makes me think that this product is not fit for consumption.
I honestly think it’s just a ridiculous ploy and that the product is fine. We need a proper regulatory system instead of this junk. I do think it’s unenforceable though.
I wonder if we're not fucking ourselves.
"Not enforceable" may have been a thing of the past, with the way technology has developed. We may be approaching a point where terms & conditions ARE enforceable.
Write on the money you used to purchase this by accepting this money you agree to the terms of service...
Eat shit turdblossoms.
No way this is legally binding. It amounts to a bait and switch. A product was purchased and provided without agreement to any further terms. Then they sneak in supposed terms after the fact based upon the action of opening the product. That is a change in agreement made without any consideration for the purchaser. That's not generally allowed in contact law.
Furthermore, I really doubt that they can get away with the argument that the act of opening a product can constitute any amount of conscious agreement to some writing on a package. If for no other reason than that this is (afaik) a novel way to attempt to coerce agreement such that nobody would expect such an agreement to be part of the opening process and likely won't notice it.
And it's not accessible for every person who may be using this product even if they do notice the words. Are you a non-English speaker? Farsighted? Blind? Illiterate? Would you have any way to even be aware that those words are terms that somehow binding you to an agreement by virtue of your opening the thing you just bought? Would you have any reason to even suspect that that is the case?
Also, they'll undoubtedly claim that the fact that you have the opened product means that you agreed to the terms, but that is also not the case. Your mom opened it for you and wrapped it as a gift? You bought it secondhand? The packaging was torn open when it shipped to you and you never had any reason to see this text in the first place? It was misprinted? Any of those things and more would mean you never agreed to anything. And they have no way to prove any of those things weren't the case.
Just stupid. I have zero doubt that any number of lawyers would love take this to court and get that payday.
Yep, I was just agreeing with someone else saying this is unenforceable. Just a ridiculous ploy and an attempt to make it precedent.
It actually does have legal precident. You know how you can't read or accept the EULA for software until after you purchase it?
They get away with stuff like that when they have sold you a "license" to their software, rather than something you gave actually purchased outright. It is argued that a license is a an agreement to access a software product, rather than ownership of it, and putting an EULA in between your license purchase or changing it later doesn't affect your purchase because you continue to hold the license even if you choose not to agree to the terms necessary to use it. It's a bit different for a physical item that you have actual ownership over, not a license to use it (pending agreement).
I also find all of that to be loophole bullshit that should be fixed, but that's a separate issue.
While true, the software put it in your face and forces you to interact with a screen that says "EULA". I doubt using a consumable as intended will hold any jurisprudence. But then again look who we have appointing judges right now...
All it does is prove to the purchaser that the fuckers don't trust the basic safety and fitness for use of their product. Spectacular self own.
Absofuckinglutely
If I bought it and got home and found this, I'd return it as I have before. You're not trapping me into agreeing for anything without the notice on the OUTSIDE of the product packaging. Fuck this
Plus it speaks volumes to the product itself. If they're trying to pull shit like this there's no way I'm trusting whatever they're trying to get me to put in my body.
Is there a bigger red flag than a message on it saying 'if you break this seal you can't sue us!'
There's an easy solution: keep buying it, break the seal to get to the message, then return it. Have your friends do the same, at the same store. Pretty soon that product will be gone and you can move on to the next store.
If the store starts to bitch about it, you can claim that you wanted to see if the statement had been removed.
Forced Arbitration should be illegal everywhere.
Usually is
This isn't mildly annoying, this is corporate hellscape.
It depends if you live in a Google state or an Apple state.
It says you're bound by "opening and using" the product, rather than "opening or using". Have someone else open it for you. Then neither of you have done both.
Thus is the kind of legalistic bullshit interpretation I can get right behind
Add to this the fact they try to enforce mandatory arbitration - a thing that shouldn't ever exist to begin with, in any jurisdiction, and is actually unenforceable in many.
In most of Europe, no contract can take away legal rights
This, and contract details that are shown after opening the packaging (as seen here covered by the lid) are void.
This is Vital Proteins brilliant response to being taken to court over heavy metal and "foreign materials" contamination in their products.
Do you have any supporting links? I saw a reddit post saying something similar but I cant find a real article or support. Either way I am returning the product.
https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/prop65/complaints/2017-02480C5316.pdf
Found searching ‘“vital proteins” lawsuit’
Sued by an environmental nonprofit for failing to warn about the presence of lead and heavy metals as required by CA law. They settled.
Found searching ‘“vital proteins” lawsuit’
that's just cheating
I hope you returned that shit. That’s not mildly infuriating, that’s capitalism has officially run amok and needs to be taken out back and shot in the head
Open it from the bottom.