Eric Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
> . . . You would say, "wait a minute, that doesn't make sense. You want me > to give you all that money without really believing or having a basis for > believing that what you're saying is true. Sorry, no dice." > > This is all apart from any legal questions. > Actually, that is central to the legal questions. People on Planet Rossi have the peculiar notion that contracts are enforced based strictly on the words in them. If you can write a clever enough contract, you can force someone to pay you no matter what happens in the real world. This resembles the notion among income tax conspiracy believers that that if the flag in a courtroom has a fringe, the court is not legitimate and you can ignore the judgement: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flag.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_conspiracy_arguments#Conspiracy_arguments.2C_in_general This is sort of a magical escape clause that the conspiracy people think the government can be forced to abide by. It doesn't work that way. They end up in jail, fringe or no fringe. You might call this a fringe belief. In real life, a judge, mediator, or consumer agency applies common sense when enforcing a contract, or excusing payment. It makes no difference what the contract says. If it is clear that the services were not rendered, or the goods not delivered, or the goods were defective, the customer does not have to pay. - Jed
