Reply to post:

I have to say that's the only sensible response to blackmail.

X knows you did Y and can tell anyone at any time.

X threatens to tell everyone.

Unless you do something for X that's costly to you.

There's no way you can trust X, so effectively that information is already in the public domain for all you know, therefore you're better off just saying "OK, go for it... by the way, my lawyer is interested in your threat of blackmail and how you legally obtained that information".

I think the same about muggings, car jackings etc. "your money or your life?". What kind of deal is that? You're already threatening to kill me, therefore I have to assume you're going to do that to remove any witness anyway, therefore why should I assist you in finding valuables which may well contribute to you repeating this incident, valuables which you are otherwise suggesting you wouldn't be able to get any other way if I *don't* co-operate (which in itself suggests you're not actually willing to kill me, but whatever) --Throws wallet/car key down sewer---

Now neither of us have it. And if you were going to kill me anyway, you still will. And if you weren't, then you still won't.

Same with hostage negotiation (they've already kidnapped your daughter and threatened to kill her, how much trust can you put in them to release her even if you give all your money to them?) and a lot of other things.

Sure, it works by intimidation, but even if there was a public-outing on the horizon that you don't necessarily want, why do things their way when there's literally no advantage and they *already* proved they can't be trusted.