There is really no need for name calling.
There is an old saying that goes something like "It is better to have said nothing and be thought a fool, than to have spoken and let it be known." I know how you'll react due to the fact you're quite immature, but the truth of the matter in this case is that the previous statement is addressed toward you.
This is the second time you've jumped on my post like you had something to prove. This is the second time you've been wrong. The next time you go skimming through google in an effort to flame someone I highly recommend you read through the entire context of your source.
When a definition is provided including the text "Reasonably certain" or "reasonably acceptable", the intent suggests that the terms be definite - or that - the parties involved and members of the court can clearly ascertain the terms of the agreement. Essentially, to utilize your model "Bubba will give stuff to you" is not reasonably agreeable "Bubba will deliver 1 gold bar in exchange for 3 widgets you will provide to Bubba" is reasonably certain. In the first sentence, it is not reasonable to determine what bubba will provide you with, where as in the second it is quite clear. The second validates the offer and allows the parties to enter into Agreement.
Now, to be more correct - terms of an agreement must be LAWFUL and MORALLY ACCEPTABLE. You would have been correct on that one, but that's not what you said, in either case it would be grabbing at straws to suggest this is an uncouth practice.
Addressing the next comment, the one where you slobber all over yourself and forget yet again, the context of the situation therefore confirming your status as a common dullard:
Let's pretend Zywar opened his account over a year ago. "By clicking submit you agree to the terms and conditions and the EULA" type notice on the KOL website. The EULA cleverly refers back to about every legal document the company has available. I am sorry I don't care enough to look back but if you challenge me I will to further prove your intellectual laziness; one of these documents ( I know because I saw it the other night before I wrote it.. hint hint ) clearly states these terms are subject to change without notice. When Zywar accepted the original terms, he accepted the responsibility to stay informed of T&C changes. ((By the way, and pardon the stream of consciousness, this does in fact happen all the time. The difference between your model of the bank and the company in question- K2, is that banks will send you a little pamphlet in the mail to read. I assume this difference is due to the fact the bank's business is not 100% web driven like that of K2 Networks. It is your responsibility to read through the contract living service agreements, not the service providers to spoon feed you)) In the event that Zywar's account was opened prior to the introduction of re-occurring payment options, he was notified to check for updates
So last month when he purchased the goods or services from K2, he did agree to these terms and had the opportunity to be informed. When you purchase something, you automatically agree to the conditions of the sale, without prejudice. AHA!!! Now, that's a completely DIFFERENT topic all together. I won't even attempt to speak on this.. I know you won't get it. Quick, go to google.. type in "without prejudice", read 3 lines and come back claiming to have a clue!
In summary, I am still correct and you have once again proven to be just itching to win an e-fight. You will never "win" anything so long as you act like such a fool. Try having a conversation instead of being a cheese about it. I rarely post anything anymore, and when I do, I'm only trying to be helpful. When someone says "hey I've got a problem" and the rest of you go on about "you retard, stupid mofo dumbass" you've blown it. I'm trying to help and provide a little more substance than just "Fuck K2" With that said, I'm certainly not perfect and have been wrong a time or two. I would love to learn something new if you've got something to teach me... but with your futile attempts to be insulting you've only portrayed yourself as a person who's argument is not worthy of consideration. If I make an incorrect statement when trying to be helpful, provide a clarification - I'll admit if I'm not correct. At the end of the day, in your haste to be "cool" you've failed at proving my information inaccurate. You should really try a different approach. You might find you could actually have a valid statement if you weren't in such a hurry to be right.
I'll say nothing further on the topic. Say what you want, I have nothing to prove to one such as yourself. I'll look forward to your convulsions of idiocy the next time I try to offer up some food for thought.