Moving can either be out of necessity or an act of desire. Whatever the case, moving rarely comes at a convenient time and involves so many variables that it is difficult to exhale until all of the documents are signed. Even then, that point in the process instantaneously starts a whole new chapter in the book of moving. No matter how long it takes to sell (or not sell) your previous home, whether you're able to find your dream kitchen or settle for less, if you're moving down the street, across the country, or around the world, the act of moving can be completely overwhelming. Long story short: Moving is a process. In the midst of all the uncertainties, there are a few ways to stay organized while moving. This short list is meant to guide you through steps to keep you on track during a stressful time. The largest piece of advice I can give you is to start by decluttering your current living space. Having less to deal with will help you feel more in control of the situation. Finding a realtor that you trust and feel comfortable working with will put your mind at ease (most of the time) about the process of listing your house and finding a buyer. Let your realtor do the work for you so you can concentrate on keeping your home "show ready" and begin to look at options on the other side of the move, like where you'll be working, spending your time, and researching schools or neighborhoods. Make a list of people you'll need to update contact information with once you leave. This should include any and all businesses you frequent or subscribe to, like pest control services, lawn maintenance, even all of your neighborhood loyal buyer programs you participate in. Do not overlook your banks, investment companies, retirement funds, healthcare providers for you and your family members, and even you pets. And, of course, family and friends. Question: At the end of the story, if you follow the authors guidance, you will probably Options: A. not enough information B. trade your house C. sell your house D. rent your house === The correct answer is
C

(Question)
Thank you for the a2a! I have a habit of making mental errors; some funny, some not. This one just happens to be funny. We had "open critiques" in art school. The idea was A- to point out how we could do it better, and B- to toughen us up for the advertising world. It's brutal, cruel, and cutthroat, and get ready for your stupid clients to ruin your tasteful design and fuck it all kinds of up to put a picture of their ugly-ass crotch dropping on there, or a huge starburst that says "SALE SALE SALE!". You had to learn not to care, and do your fulfilling artwork on the side. It's just a job; nothing personal. We were in the middle of a critique, and it was turning ugly. The only time our professor would jump in was if it turned personal. It had. He laid back and let us fight it out, until someone told the girl we were critiquing that "with your taste from growing up in a trailer park, looks like you'll be working for the Auto Trader" (a shitty, newsprint magazine that people sell used cars in- the worst of the worst design jobs). Before our professor could comment, I blurted out "For fuck's sake, Mom." I was about to say "tell them to break it the fuck up!" until the laughter started. Then I realized I'd called my professor, who had an MFA and spent 20 years in advertising at Saatchi and Saatchi, "Mom". He responded with such amazing, quick wit; "Ms. Hood, I admire your devotion to your mother; just remember she stays home while you come to class." I caught hell for it that entire semester. Luckily, we (almost) all had pretty tough skins, so it was amusing, even to our somewhat staid professor. He wrote on my end of semester assessment "Respectfully, Not Your Mom." I still keep that assessment to remind me to wear life like a loose garment. We all say stupid shit sometimes; just laugh at yourself and enjoy the silly moment. Question: Why was the student saying critical words to the other student? Options: A. The student was cruel B. The professor ordered an open critique C. The other students wanted to hear negative commentary D. not enough information === The correct answer is
(Answer)
B

Question: If you turned on the TV towards the end of 2002 you could have been forgiven for thinking that Britain had gone absolutely horseshit mental. Every week, it seemed, another pretty young girl from a nice family, who was happy and popular and always did well at school, was being kidnapped or murdered by what the Sun newspaper cheerfully termed 'evil paedo scum'. Naming and shaming was as popular a feature in the Murdoch press as Page Three girls and discounted holidays to Butlin's. Of course you can't blame parents for wanting to keep their children safe; that's pretty much the job description of a parent. And, on the face of it, the tabloids were doing a public service in warning us about the paedophile menace lurking in our midst. The problem came when it turned out that a huge number of these concerned tabloid-reading parents were also absolute fucking morons. For every story of an actual sex offender being driven from their house by a baying mob there was one like that of Dr Yvette Cloete, a doctor at the Royal Gwent Hospital in Newport, South Wales, who returned home from work to find that a group of 'concerned parents' had daubed the word 'paedo' on her front door in bright red paint. Dr Cloete was a consultant paediatrician. Easy mistake. If you're an absolute fucking moron. And so it was that one hung-over morning, after reading yet another story about vigilantes who had threatened to stone Maxine Carr, the girlfriend of Soham killer Ian Huntley, to death during her high-profile trial for perverting the course of justice, I decided to set up a website parodying this collective national madness. The result of two or three hours of hung-over labour was thinkofthechildren.co.uk, a spoof campaign site which claimed to offer a handy online guide for crazy vigilantes of all stripes to co-ordinate their crazy vigilante efforts. Although there are a few parts of the site I'm still a bit proud of, the majority of it was, I freely admit, satire of the lowest order. Question: How was the thinkofthechildren.co.uk site received? Options: A. not enough information B. It was viewed as a satire. C. It was viewed as offensive. D. It was a success. === The correct answer is
Answer:
A