← Back to context Comment by khazhoux 19 hours ago We recommend reading the article before commenting. 2 comments khazhoux Reply jLaForest 4 hours ago i read the article... that is its entire premise khazhoux 1 hour ago 1. Nowhere does the article mention his current wealth (or lack of)2. He didn’t “forget” — he misunderstood his contract, and only caught the error much later.3. He’s not looking for pity. He writes: “I offer this in the spirit of a cautionary tale. I remain sanguine, and amused.”Maybe something about his story bothered you?
jLaForest 4 hours ago i read the article... that is its entire premise khazhoux 1 hour ago 1. Nowhere does the article mention his current wealth (or lack of)2. He didn’t “forget” — he misunderstood his contract, and only caught the error much later.3. He’s not looking for pity. He writes: “I offer this in the spirit of a cautionary tale. I remain sanguine, and amused.”Maybe something about his story bothered you?
khazhoux 1 hour ago 1. Nowhere does the article mention his current wealth (or lack of)2. He didn’t “forget” — he misunderstood his contract, and only caught the error much later.3. He’s not looking for pity. He writes: “I offer this in the spirit of a cautionary tale. I remain sanguine, and amused.”Maybe something about his story bothered you?
i read the article... that is its entire premise
1. Nowhere does the article mention his current wealth (or lack of)
2. He didn’t “forget” — he misunderstood his contract, and only caught the error much later.
3. He’s not looking for pity. He writes: “I offer this in the spirit of a cautionary tale. I remain sanguine, and amused.”
Maybe something about his story bothered you?