Bullshit. I've known plenty of girls who wouldn't turn on a single light (other than her phone) when someone was sleeping in a room, even if it means hopping around getting dressed in the dark. Meanwhile I've known plenty of guys who would turn on every light and the TV regardless of how little sleep the other(s) have had. You apparently just know only bitches. Broaden your scope.

Nah, just take a nap in the bed (no pun intended) until the little guys mom shows up, they almost always do within a short enough time

Hints why his parents smacked him. And again I mention LIT CANDLES, though also here I don't see any candles at all. But still, even at 12-15, don't contaminate the whole cake, priorities people.

I'm sorry guest, that's just shitty human being. Sure my mom would take my phone if I abused it, but only if it was my fault and she'd never go through it.

He was hiding it in his lap in preparation. I'm guessing they do this a lot.

Its literally an A or B system. This isn't Facebook with half a dozen options. Seriously, if you have your own voting criteria thats fine, but don't assume everyone follows your methods. Personally, I only downvote when I seriously don't like something or find it highly offensive/disgusting (ie pedophilia jokes) but that's just ME. Im also not one who originally downvoted guest. But again, that's how the voting works. If they don't like a comment they usually downvote, simple as that, and there's nothing wrong with it.

@riyriamistborn like I said, in each of the cases I know of, every avenue of private messaging was ignored until after the poster was able to make a pour-pitiful-me post. This was we know they are at least aware of what is going on. If the poster really has an issue with it, or the commenter is just being an ass, the poster can always delete the comment from their post.
@guest_ those last two lines actually describe how I feel about a lot of the screenshot facebook exchanges/out of context candids ect we see online. For example, the "grown ass kid in the cart/stroller" or "kid on a leash". We don't know their circumstances. There are a lot of kids with mental/behavioral problems that make them a risk to themselves if they aren't contained so. But we don't know their story.

Found the willfully illiterate guest

That made absolutely no sense. Again, you are trying to apply modern civilian standards to the workings of royalty in the 1700s. But I honestly don't know why I even bother, if you choose ignorance that's your problem.

That is the point of the downvote concept, yes.

As a prince, especially in that time, that was EXACTLY his duty. He was Joe Smoe from down the block. He was a prince, and given his isolated location, its implied he may have been in exile for previous bad behavior and that was his last chance to actually show he could step up and be concerned for his subjects, which he failed at. By extension, those who had been charged with his care and training were also punished. Bare in mind, this was France only a generation prior to the revolution, so the were REALLY unhappy with their royalty at that point. Given how reality unfolded, the cursed prince probably would have still been better off even if the curse hadn't been broken.

They may not have been responding. I've actually known a couple of people who were like that, they were all over social media but wouldn't respond privately even in an emergency, but then would post something along the lines of "so sad, if only I'd known" or "No one tells me anything", so family literally had to start commenting big things like serious illness on their posts so they couldn't play that shit.

Wow, you seriously just completely invalidated everything you have said and may ever say with that first statement. Way to go Trump. I made a logical statement, and you ask if I'm PMSing because I disagree with your BS. Very mature.