The argument of non-coherence can be useful for explaining two principally different approaches about the interrelationship between constitutional principles originating from the offline reality and their applicability in the online domain. The first says that the constitutional ideas of the digital domain originate from the offline domain, and the second says that they do not, their origin being from inside the online domain in isolation from the offline. The process of the transposition of human rights law from one domain to another, including constitutional principles, has three stages. The first has to do with the reasons for such a transposition. The second stage is the emergence of ideas and subsequent discourse saying that something in human rights law and/or practice has to be changed in order to provide adequate protection online. The third stage of the transposition of offline fundamental rights to the online domain is the acceptance of new rights or principles, or conversely, the rejection of claims due to the absence of their necessity.

Objections against digital self-normativity are primarily related to questioning whether a moral dimension is embedded in the normative function of algorithms, and the increase in predictive power connected to the automatic implementation of norms. These matters concern secondary level rules of implementation and practice but are often thought to reflect the moral dimension of digital primary norms. There appears no comparable continuum between self-made private rules and international or domestic legal instruments governing digital human rights. I term such an absence as the idealism abyss; that is, the idealistic nature inherent in human rights articulated by positive legal instruments is not carried as uninterrupted into the self-normativity of digital agents. Once the self-normativity of digital private enterprises becomes justified, the idealism abyss leads to the necessity of self-constitutionality. In this case, primary and secondary self-regulation form one logical structure. The rejection of the idealism abyss shows an image where the self-made secondary norms rely on primary- (constitutional-) level norms originating from the non-digital realm, but their content may have changed in the course of the transposition.