Making a legal opinion based on zero credibility in order to push a change is the disingenuous element. Luke has no fucking idea what he is talking about and his retarded morality can go fuck itself.
Do this thing or you might be liable is a threat. And worse it is a threat based on an intentional lie or based on ignorance, but in either case it is an attempt to force people to do what he wants under the threat of violence. It matters not who is bringing the violence. Be it god or law it is still a threat being made.
Not a threat. At most it's FUD - which is totally fair to view as disingenuous.
If I told you that you should buy gold instead of bitcoin because I think the U.S. government will inevitably outlaw Bitcoin altogether, that would be an opinion; not at threat. You may think I have no idea what I'm talking about; and, consequently dismiss it as disingenuous. That would be your opinion. It's all good.
Eh it’s the same way a protection racket doesn’t threaten your business. They are just protecting you from those that would do you harm but you have to pay them to get their protection…who knows what sort of bad things might happen to you and who might be the authors of those bad things in the future.
If you want to play semantical games that’s fine, but please don’t ignore the intentions of these scum bag bootlickers.
"It matters not who is bringing the violence".
What makes a protection racket different is that it absolutely DOES matter.
I’ll just say that people bringing these threats to the forefront of the Bitcoin community will likely be in league with the people who put the large op return csam on chain, but if for some reason that’s not true it won’t invalidate the scum baggers of trying to change Bitcoin because of the fear mongering of state violence.
The pearl clutching statist cucks can fuck themselves right off.
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
e.g. your neighbor business warning you "I think they may get violent if you don't pay the protection" is not a threat from the neighbor business.
In which case they are part of the protection racket. We must assume the neighboring business is funding the protection racket just as we must assume that these soft forkers are agents of the legal/moral consequence bringers. While they may claim to be unwilling agents they are doing the work to undermine Bitcoin regardless of their stated intention.
The fact that their threats are based on dubious legal theory and have no basis in reality is strong evidence that they are willing agents of the state and not helpful neighbors.
"We must assume the neighboring business is funding the protection racket"
Wow.
That’s how protection rackets work. They don’t just target one business…they target the neighborhood. Anyone paying the racket is funding their operations.
A soldier who loads the weapons that are used to kill civilians is liable for the war crime…perhaps not as much as the ones ordering the killings but they are part of the immoral machinery. Ignorance or fear do not absolve you of guilt.
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
