My point is that the decisions from a reasonably benevolent monarch are still neither freedom or an attempt to be impartial. It was the perception (usually justified) that Twitter's own stated rules were applied a lot tougher on some more than others. People were mostly upset with pre-Musk Twitter for bans (usually for breaking their rules for "Abusive Behavior") which I'm pretty sure are still unchanged, weren't being applied impartially to people that were critical of mainstream narratives. Jack Dorsey went to a lot of trouble to claim otherwise when they banned Alex Jones: Making a commitment to enforce those rules (or whatever rules would replace them) impartially and more transparently would be the reasonable expectation, not for Musk to make up different criteria or justifications to just do what he wants. As grey as to what people might agree specifically is free speech, it's a hell of a lot easier to say what Musk is doing now is definitely not upholding any principle of free speech even if it's a better place to be.
You can tell the TSLA shareholders are not happy. Soon they will turn on him…. So either musk will give up his Twitter trolling or hand TSLA over to someone else. Saw this on Reddit: “Failing upward on daddy's slave money doesn't make you Hank ****!n Scorpio.” End of the day his plan to dump Tesla stock at peak worked but ended up throwing it away on Twitter…
You are right, but most sane people prefer a reasonably benevolent monarch to an overstaffed moloch of woke social justice warriors living their best lives, shoving an agenda down everyone's throat. These people (if someone funds them, which is doubtful, and if they actually had any entrepreneurial talent and work ethic, which is even more doubtful) could try to start their own Twitter so they can continue what they have been doing. Or they could whine about how mean Elon was to them...on Twitter. P.S.: Nice to see you post, @Deji McGever. Hope you have been well.
Lol. Twitter is a publicly traded company. The employees were doing nothing more than following the executives' orders and their orders are based on a fiduciary responsibility to share holders which means the employees number one goal is to make sure twitter is as ad friendly as possible because that correlatives with maximization of profit you dofus.
They say Elon is crazy He really don't care That's his prerogative They say he's nasty But Elon don't give a damn Getting Twitter is how he live Some messy questions Why Elon is so real? But they don't understand him They really don't know the deal about our brother Trying hard to make it right Not long ago Before Elon win this fight, sing Everybody's talking all this stuff about Elon Why don't they just let Elon live? Tell me why he don't need commission Make his own decisions That's Elon's prerogative It's Elon's prerogative (it's Elon's prerogative) Elon made this money, YOU didn't right Fred! @pgabriel @rocketsjudoka @jontro
Yep that's why I sold most of my Tesla stock in the first half of the year. I still own some and it split over the summer.
Yes it's a very situation with publicly traded companies and as such they were ulitmately responsible to the shareholders which meant doing things that advertisers liked. I've made this point a few times but a lot of corporate "wokeness" isn't about woke managers but about changes in the culture driven by the market. Target and Delta would never sponsor Gay pride parades if they didn't think it was something that would benefit their bottom lines. Corporations are rarely the leaders on social change especially one's that depend on advertising revenue. Now that Musk has taken Twitter private he certainly can do with it what he wants, change the rules and allow who he wants on it. He also has the freedom mismanagement it. If Musk doesn't want to maximize Twitter's profits because of what he considers free speech he's free to do so.
He's cashing in lib tears when it's smug city libs who are driving up the market price of resold Teslas. Hope he microdoses wisely. Don't want to pull a Fried Bankman.
What Elon Musk Is Doing to Twitter Is What He Did at Tesla and SpaceX - The New York Times (nytimes.com) ... Since late last month, the 51-year-old has laid off 50 percent of Twitter’s 7,500 employees and accepted the resignations of 1,200 or more. On Monday, he began another round of layoffs, two people said. He tweeted that he was sleeping at Twitter’s offices in San Francisco. And he has applied mission-driven language, telling Twitter’s workers that the company could go bankrupt if he wasn’t able to turn it around. Those who want to work on “Twitter 2.0” must commit to his “hard core” vision in writing, he has said. David Deak, who worked at Tesla from 2014 to 2016 as a senior engineering manager overseeing a supply chain for battery materials, said Mr. Musk “clearly thrives in existential circumstances.” He added, “He quasi creates them to light the fire under everybody.” The similarities between Mr. Musk’s approach to Twitter and what he did at Tesla and SpaceX are evident, added Tammy Madsen, a management professor at Santa Clara University. But it’s unclear if he will find the means to motivate employees at a social media company as he did with workers whose quests were to move people away from gas-powered cars or send humans into space. “At Tesla and SpaceX, the approach has always been high risk, high reward,” Dr. Madsen said. “Twitter has been high risk, but the question is: What is the reward that comes out of it?” Mr. Musk did not respond to a request for comment. ...
A history of this thread in 1 paragraph: Ha Ha lefties! Elon's gonna buy twiiter and save the universe! Ha Ha nazi's, no he's not! Ha Ha lefties...Elon bought twitter! Ha Ha nazis. Twitter's going bankrupt. Meme's and videos galore.
