If two people make a deal in private it doesn’t set a precedent for another private deal
It does…
That’s literally what the word “precedent” means.
If you give your dog a treat at 3pm every day, it sets that precedent. You and your dog in private have reached a deal which results in further expectations.
There is no legal system in place there.
But if you give the treat early, you set another precedent that early is an option and the timeline is negotiable, so your dog will ask early
Like, “precedent” is a psychological concept …
Does that make sense now?
Was the only time you’ve heard that word in the context of “legal precedence”? That would explain all of this.
If I give my dog a treat every day at the same time that doesn’t mean somebody else has to give their dog a treat at that time which what you are implying.
Again. If two people make a deal in private it doesn’t set a precedent for another private or public deal. That’s it.
It does…
That’s literally what the word “precedent” means.
If you give your dog a treat at 3pm every day, it sets that precedent. You and your dog in private have reached a deal which results in further expectations.
There is no legal system in place there.
But if you give the treat early, you set another precedent that early is an option and the timeline is negotiable, so your dog will ask early
Like, “precedent” is a psychological concept …
Does that make sense now?
Was the only time you’ve heard that word in the context of “legal precedence”? That would explain all of this.
If I give my dog a treat every day at the same time that doesn’t mean somebody else has to give their dog a treat at that time which what you are implying.
Does that make sense now?
I’d think the clear analogy would be multiple dogs in the room…
But it’s clear no progress is getting made here, have a good one