• @Hobo
    link
    369 months ago

    A sticker wouldn’t count according to sovcit logic. Basically if it’s not pants on head insane chicken scratch then it isn’t binding under their “wet ink” belief. Also something about red ink is special, but I haven’t quite nailed that down yet. It doesn’t help that sovcit lore is harder to trace than time travel in the movie Primer, and has more continuity issues than the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise.

    • @a9cx34udP4ZZ0
      link
      9
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I would assume it’s because most government forms require you to fill them out in blue or black in. Being the edgelords they are, they picked a color of ink that would be rejected by most government institutions.

      Nope, crazier than that:

      They use red ink (or sometimes even blood) instead of blue or black ink to signify to the evil shadow government and their puppet judges that it is the true flesh-and-blood person who is signing a particular document and not the corporate shell.

    • @massacre
      link
      English
      69 months ago

      I’m almost afraid to ask, but I keep seeing this shit… what is so magical about a “wet ink” signature? Ink dries fast, so I presume this means it’s the original signture and not a copy of whatever contract (or treaty?) in question. I’m so confused.

      • @Hobo
        link
        109 months ago

        Really it’s just a misunderstanding of contract law. While it’s getting less common, because of esignatures growing in popularity, wet ink signatures used to be required on some contracts. Which is really someone just physically making a mark on a physical piece of paper. Basically sovcits decided that “wet ink” applied to everything, which I can assure you is not the case.

        Here’s some more actual info about wet ink signatures:

        https://www.adobe.com/acrobat/business/resources/wet-signature.html