Question: I will never own a Chanel suit. It is unlikely that I will ever own a (genuine) Chanel handbag. However, a Chanel nail polish was definitely attainable. Whilst they are ridiculously expensive compared with most other nail polishes ($AU39), they are still much more affordable than the $AU1,000,000,000 a handbag costs (or so I estimate as I have never actually priced one). After seeing swatches of Peridot online, I knew that baby would one day be mine. The other two polishes in the collection - Quartz and Graphite - did not excite me the way Peridot did. That was until I read this review of Graphite on the Polish Police. Suddenly, Graphite was on my radar. It was stuck in my head like an ear worm; another baby, soon to be adopted. I argued with myself for about a month on whether to get these polishes or not. Could I really spend nearly $80 on nail polish. It did seem rather excessive to me. Then, Myers sent me a $10 voucher for my birthday and I got a $30 voucher for doing a survey so the decision was made. For $38 of my own money (less than the cost of two OPI's!) I became the proud owner of Peridot and Graphite. Here is my review of Graphite. Graphite is the most stunningly intriguing nail polish I have ever owned. In the bottle it looks a little bit dull and boring - grey and bland. But on the nail it is completely different. In some lights it is silvery, others a more gun metal grey, and in others it has almost a goldish tone to it. It is super sparkly, yet is not a glitter polish - though in saying that it appears more glitter than shimmer. It is quite opaque. Two coats and you can't see the nail line. In the photos below I have actually applied three coats (plus an addition two top coats of clear) because I was going to a wedding and I wanted it to be perfect. But ordinarily two would be sufficient. According to the above context, answer the following question. Why did the writer obtain a $30 voucher:
Answer: because she filled out a survey

Question: I really struggle to feel bad for people who actively choose to be miserable and manipulative. I’m dorky and like to use little proverbs all the time. One of my favorites is this: “you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.” At the end of the day, if someone has a problem, they can never resolve it if they don’t truly wish to. You can give someone all the resources in the world, but you can’t force them to utilize them. When I was 16, I dated a horrible guy. He was abusive verbally, emotionally, and sexually. He was an incredibly troubled young man and refused to seek help for his severe mental health issues. I eventually came to understand that he reveled in his misery. It was his identity. He acted like he wanted a cure and I’d set him up with resources, but he refused every single one. He may have struggled with serious mental illnesses, but being miserable perversely made him happy and he loved to use his struggles to justify his inexcusable behavior. He wanted to drag as many people into his fiery pit of anguish as possible. I later suffered from severe depression myself, and I never once used it as an excuse to hurt other people. My ex wasn’t struggling with his mental health in terms of deliberating and carefully harming others. He was simply exhibiting a personality trait, one he chose to cultivate… and it wasn’t my problem. I ended up cutting him off completely in spite of all the threats. I will never feel bad for the awful plight he refuses to help himself out of. I have no patience for that type of person. Know what we call them? Toxic. Poison. A waste of time. According to the above context, answer the following question. Who was abusive to the author?
Answer: The boyfriend she had at 16.

Question: For years, Aimee Lind, a librarian at the Getty Research Institute, has been struggling with ways to make architecture archives more accessible to users. To help solve this problem, she co-founded the California Architecture Archives Network (or CalArchNet) with her Cal Poly SLO colleague Jessica Holada. Together they have organized a series of one-day mini-conferences designed to foster dialogue and collaboration among librarians, archivists, and curators at California institutions that house architecture archives. The goal of these semiannual meetings is to create a space for convergence among professionals who intersect with architectural archives in different ways. Architecture archives, often containing large drawings and scale models, present unique problems due to their size and fragility. CalArchNet participants are interested in improving the overall user experience for visitors to the archives by looking for solutions to obstacles to access. This space for an informal exchange of ideas provides an opportunity to be transparent about the challenges repositories face when managing and processing architecture holdings, as well as encourages investigation and experimentation into ways new technologies may help to solve accessibility issues, such as improved interaction with digitized collections via the IIIF protocol or 3D-scanned facsimile models and virtual walk-throughs. October 27 marked the third meeting of CalArchNet, held at the Palm Springs Art Museum, Architecture and Design Center, with representatives from 13 institutions in attendance. Topics discussed included historic site preservation research methodology, leveraging statewide resources to enhance discovery of collections, security considerations, GIS mapping technologies, and the use of linked open data to make connections between collections. The day concluded with a curator-led tour of the exhibition Albert Frey and Lina Bo Bardi: A Search for Living Architecture. If you’re an archivist, librarian, or curator working with architecture... According to the above context, answer the following question. The mini-conferences probably last
Answer:
A day