It almost always does.
Some person going on and on about their subject matter, doesn't hear a dissenting word from his audience, believes they understand and support his position. You see this in politics, religion and in general discussion between men and women.
That belief may be a false belief. Even if it's a true belief, your assertion of implication is still false. If I go on and on about the supposed merits of something you believe is false and you say not a word, my belief or an onlookers belief that you don't hold a contrary belief (all because you remained silent when you could have spoken up) does not guarantee any conclusion about what your beliefs are. See, "imply" is a technical term, and if there is indeed an implication, it must logically follow without flaw.
If I say "I don't like black people," that highly suggests I'm racist, but because I might be withholding the view that I don't like anyone, we cannot guarantee the conclusion I'm racist. The logical implication that I'm racist is absent. Again, "implication" or "imply" is a highly technical term, so although silence may in fact suggest something, it doesn't alone imply that something when there lies the possibility that a conclusion cannot be guaranteed.
Besides, there are often other reasons why a person may remain silent in face of a view of opposition.
You must be presumptive to even think it's suggestive, but to hold the view there is an implication is patently false.
