Message from @Anastasia
Discord ID: 630305804368609285
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
@T3CHN01200 make this quicker
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.
Is unenforceability grounds to classify a thing as coercive?
Illegitimate enforcement is grounds to classify a thing as coercive.
Agreed, but again, implicit consent is not the enforcement thereof
Will you admit this or not?
Unenforceability means no there is no contract.
Will you admit or not?
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.
That implication is incorrect
I reject it
Please explain.
I reject that implicit consent confers enforcement, and unless you consider yourself a statist by your logic, I presume you agree
Ergo I believe you’ve called your own arguments herein irrelevant
Because you agree that implicit consent is not the enforcement thereof
Ergo implicit consent is not coercive
Why do you reject it?
Because it is incorrect
Explain your claim.