[nh23423fefe]

you haven't made an argument for why stable rules are good nor have you justified the assertion that prosocial enforcement even exists

[ajkjk]

Nor do I feel the need to, since my goal was only to present the obvious refutation to the (basically fascist) argument I was replying to.

Anyway both are self-evident: prosocial enforcement exists because we see it around us every day and stable prosocial systems are good because people pick them, given the choice.

[nh23423fefe]

win argument button pressed lol, especially strong when mixed with shifting goal posts

[ajkjk]

You're thinking of comment threads as some kind of high school debate contest? for some reason?

[nh23423fefe]

it seems to me like you have no aim at all.

[ajkjk]

My aim was to communicate the thing that I wrote. Broadly, to supply the obvious refutation to the thing I replied to for any passing readers.