[danbruc]

They are trivial in the sense that you can easily reason about them. Sure, you can construct wildly complex scenarios where available knowledge, resulting consequences, existing constraints, and what not make it non-obvious what can or cannot or should or should not be done but that this will only be a consequence of the complexity of the situation. This is in contrast to [magical] free will where you have fundamental problems of even defining the meaning of your concepts and arguably you are destined to fail because the concept is logical inconsistent to begin with.

[jakobnissen]

I'm sorry, but I still completely fail to understand why concerns about competence, informed decision making, ability to understand consequences and coercion is not _the_ relevant point here.

Why is it relevant how easily we can reason about them?

[danbruc]

I agree with you that this are the relevant points but they only become the relevant points once you accept that there is no magical free will. And it seems to me that this is not generally accepted.