@DrRisen: "I love freedom"
Also @DrRisen: "?mute @Solid Sar 3d"

@ShinySilver3
I didnt block you.

I sent you a reply and the bot said you blocked me.

That's more shady than shiny.

@ShinySilver3
You're an idiot.

And you weren't being polite. You started out "polite", but then turned into all!of the things you claim you weren't.(since you seem to like to use screenshots, I can too. should I show everyone where you become the thing you say you aren't?) Jesus.

@T3CHN01200
Your analogy is an insufficient one.

How big is your apartment? Because over here in Discord, there are (in some cases) thousands of people in your apartment.

If you're going to use a house or apartment analogy, try to be realistic.

Unless you're screening EVERY SINGLE PERSON individually for explicit consent, then you're relying on implied consent. In other words, you aren't sure that EVERYONE agrees with the rules. Which means you make the assumption that everyone has, and let them in (actually, to be more realistic, they just walk on in the front door). So, when you see a huge turd in your sink, you can only blame yourself for being an irresponsible ",owner,"

And any true anarchist (AKA freedom lover) would NEVER rely on implied consent.

@Phobia yup. Spoken like a true statist.

One more time...

You stupid fuck.

I didnt block anyone. So, don't accuse me of anything. And I don't think trying to send a message, but it being blocked is my fault, so stop with the condescension.

@unwoundtoast OK, now your just an obdurate douche

Nope. Sorry. Only a true moron would accuse me of not knowing what I'm doing when he admits it's a discord issue. You can't get much dumber than that.

@Phobia
And if youre going to try to spread lies for some reason, you should tell the real story about disenthrall. The why not tell everyone the previous 50 posts where he painted himself in a corner and couldn't ",disassociate" when he had the chance. Oh,and the fact that disassociation is not the same as imposing an involuntary hierarchy. To think they're the same is something frauds would think.

@unwoundtoast
"Discord was dropping messages for many people
You are both fucking incapable twats"
You
Stupid
Fuck

@T3CHN01200
"@Anastasia there is no logical difference in the way property works between apartment leasing and a bubbled social media website...*
I just showed you how there is a logical difference. Please rebut instead of saying " I told you so".

@unwoundtoast
Why don't you either contribute something relevant or you can continue to show how incompetent you are.?

@T3CHN01200
Please explain how you would let he public at large into your apartment. And then when you do that, please explain how you plan on getting explicit consent from everyone who enters. And please explain what you limit is for capacity and how you plan on enforcing it and then please explain how any of those are what is going on in Discord.

Or, do u just rely on implicit consent to let thousands of people into your apartment.

@unwoundtoast
When you speak out of both sides of your mouth, most people call that duplicitous.

@T3CHN01200
Ummmm.....no.....YOU brought up the apartment analogy. So, let's look at it as an apartment.

@ShinySilver3
Why don't you scroll up and review your comments. You've shown yourself to be unworthy of debate.

@unwoundtoast it is when can't show how I have dome anything incompetent. Trying to send a message and being blocked for whatever reason is no indication of incompetence. However, accusing someone of being incompetent, without proof, is.

@T3CHN01200
Excuse me, you came up with the apartment analogy, I rebutted. You countered, then I did. So.......

I already explained that. Oh boy

Youre right. They are two different things. So, what are you trying to say.

I already told you.

One is an apartment and one is a server.

@T3CHN01200
Please explain how you would let he public at large into your apartment. And then when you do that, please explain how you plan on getting explicit consent from everyone who enters. And please explain what you limit is for capacity and how you plan on enforcing it and then please explain how any of those are what is going on in Discord.

Ownership involves responsibility of the property as we'll as those invited guests.

@T3CHN01200
Does the contract say you can invite the public at large in?

And how can you control your guests when you don't even have explicit consent?

Like I said, any anarchist worth their salt would NEVER accept implied consent. It's coercion.

Um. No. You brought up the apartment. So, let's look at what an apartment is. You seem to think you can open the apartment door and let anyone and everyone in and you can control them all, when there is no proof whatsoever that you can impose any involuntary heirachy over them.

@Phobia
So many people have commented on how you poison rooms with your insults and distractions and zero evidence. You have shown to the silent readers how they can't stand a chance of learning anything in any server you are in

@T3CHN01200
I'm sorry. But you brought up the apartment. I like to use realistic analogies..

Implied consent. Your argument is invalid.

it's so funny. You use statist arguments when it suits you and then revert to freedom arguments only when it suits you.

Nope. Your actions are the evidence. Duh.

Nope. It's poor. Poor quality.

Implied consent is coercion.

Typing is an action, idiot

Because I didn't give consent. You just assumed it and now you are attempting to enforce a contract that you implied I agreed to.

How could I give consent to something I didnt agree to?

Sure is.

Imposing an involuntary heirarchy over someone (because they didnt consent) is coercive.

Your assumption of their consent is not consent.

It sure is.

Prove that I consented. You can't. Also, if you want to get explicit consent, you have to ensure that the user has ACTUALLY consented. I can assure you that when I get invited into a discord server there is NO consent needed.

Prove that I consented

Prove it

Show me where it says so, other than your assumption.

Implicit consent makes the assumption that one agrees. Yet there is no factual evidence that shows that.

@unwoundtoast
I see. Resorting to insults. And you thought you were e above that.

@unwoundtoast
That is addressing your question. It's impossible to prove implicit consent factually

Unless, of course, youre a statist.

It's not relevant because you say so, isn't enough.

I just did.

Implied consent is necessarily coercive for the reason I described. It's not tough.

"You have yet to prove that implicit consent is necessarily coercive"
Sure did. Wow.

Drunk?

"You just quoted my challenge?"
Then....."That’s not a quote"
Then......"I never said that"
Hmmmmm.....

I will give you one chance here to tabula rasa

Can you opt-out of implied consent?

But that's social contract. You're using the thing so must agree to the rules. That's an assumption and cannot be backed by factual evidence. And since I didnt have to agree to any terms to enter into a server or discord, to enact new or unknown rules after entering is coercive.

It's a public forum.

Not an apartment.

Believing in social contract is what makes statism exist. Plus, its unprovable.

Show me where I consented.

Murder isn't discord.

Discord isn't murder.

I prefer to stick to the facts at hand.

Unless were talking about murder, I see no reason to talk about murder.

Unless your point has something to do with discord, I don't see the relevance.

Subject matter, and all that.

Yet you're trying to conflate murder with discord. But that's collateral

Implicit consent is what statists use to exert coercion over people.

But, implicit consent is an assumption that one agrees to the rules.

It is impossible to prove factually

And does not allow one to not agree to the rules.

The only way to enforce implicit rules is by coercion, simply because the one being involuntarily imposed upon didnt explicitly agree to rules.

That's because it is an assumption of acceptance.

A person cannot agree to anything they don't understand explicitly. It would be a fraudulent contract.

There is no binding contract with implicit consent.

They cannot enforce the non binding contract without using an involuntary hierarchy.

Implicit consent is by it's very nature coercive because it can't be enforced. To claim that it is a contract is the coercion.

Because if the one trying to enforce the contract, is using a nullity, the very thought of it being an enforceable contract is coercion.

Illegitimate enforcement is grounds to classify a thing as coercive.

Unenforceability means no there is no contract.

To what? That implied consent isn't a contract? Yes. Implied consent also implies enforcement to a statist. (One that uses might makes right)
Implied consent IS enforcement.

Please explain.

Why do you reject it?

Explain your claim.

I'm not talking about men and women. I am talking about discord.

I am talking about whether implied consent is coercive in Discord. Or YOU fuck off.
Savvy, mate?