Message from @unwoundtoast
Discord ID: 630304966829146113
And does not allow one to not agree to the rules.
Whether they use it to grant them legitimacy or not has no effect on whether implicit consent *itself* is or isn’t coercive
>Agrees to rules in order to make Discord account
>Gets banned from several servers for being an absolute twat
>***I'M BEING OPPRESSED***
@Phobia fuck off
No.
Let him have his fun @unwoundtoast
Why?
I'd recommend speaking to people here with a tad bit more respect
No
@Phobia I respect those I choose to respect
You are not one
Fuck yourself
So be it.
👍 👍 👍
The only way to enforce implicit rules is by coercion, simply because the one being involuntarily imposed upon didnt explicitly agree to rules.
@Anastasia the enforcement of implicit consent is not implicit consent itself
Whether they use it to grant them legitimacy or not has no effect on whether implicit consent *itself* is or isn’t coercive
Time to order an inordinate number of dildos for toast to give to people when he wants them to go fuck themselves...
Please
Jeff Bezos will be happy
That's because it is an assumption of acceptance.
@Anastasia that does not make the implicit consent itself coercive
Whether they use it to grant them legitimacy or not has no effect on whether implicit consent *itself* is or isn’t coercive
You legit clicked a checkbox that said that you agree to TOS
You can’t prove that moron
Jesus fucking Christ
A person cannot agree to anything they don't understand explicitly. It would be a fraudulent contract.
@Anastasia holding someone to implicit consent is not itself implicit consent
Whether they use it to grant them legitimacy or not has no effect on whether implicit consent *itself* is or isn’t coercive
There is no binding contract with implicit consent.
Correct, such does not make implicit consent coercive
They cannot enforce the non binding contract without using an involuntary hierarchy.
Also correct
But again
The enforcement != the implicit consent
Whether they use it to grant them legitimacy or not has no effect on whether implicit consent *itself* is or isn’t coercive
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.
Unenforceability is coercion?
Is that your argument?
Because if the one trying to enforce the contract, is using a nullity, the very thought of it being an enforceable contract is coercion.