I like your analogy but would say VI's is even farther removed. It's like
they saw you without shoes in the parking lot and even though you had shoes
on when you came into the store they refused you service because "you were
one of those no shoe wearing types" regardless of the fact that you
comported yourself satisfactorily while within their establishment.

In the original thread on the EQ boards, I slapped up (what I felt) was a
decent analogy of this... here goes: If I go into a store that has a "No
Shirt/No Shoes" sign while wearing sandals, purchase a Coke then leave the
store, I have entered into a brief contract with that establishment. They
agreed that I had met their criteria to purchase a product, I did so, deal
done.