Elon Musk buys Twitter to bring back Free Speech

[Ayashe Ninetails]

Whatever word he used makes no difference if he hired a private investigator to find evidence of said thing.

But anyway, that's somewhat off-topic, so I'll go back to reading about these new online safety bills (man, they are NOT playing with these fines).

Oh before I go - I don't think Twitter's current moderation standards are even enough to keep up with this. These bills are going to impact the platform regardless of who owns it.

[Aethelwine]

3 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

 

Do you realise the definition you are going by is on page 3 of the list and has almost twice as many down votes as it does positive ones?

Urban dictionary is not really what I would have thought was a particularly reliable source in the first place, but picking the fifteenth definition to make your point seems like clutching at straws.

You seem to be stretching credibility quite some way, do you really believe what you are arguing or are you just trolling? 

[Arielle Popstar]

5 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

In deciding Musk's character the main issue here isn't whether jurors were bought off somehow, or whether the law was able to determine what occurred met the terms of defamation.

What is disgusting here is that Musk hired a private investigator to try and dig up dirt on someone with little power in society who merely insulted him --  Musk paid a private investigator 52,000 dollars in an attempt to paint his opponent as a pedo.

Imagine, Arielle, that I was some famous and wealthy person, you toss an insult at me, and in response I use major resources to make you seem like a pedophile. Do you see the abuse of power here, the vindictiveness and 'unfair fighting' that shows Musk should not wield any power -- he abuses power.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/oct/08/elon-musk-diver-vernon-unsworth-pedo-idiot

Abuse of power happens al the time, even here within this forum and it is highly unlikely that most people in the world have not abused their power over another with vindictiveness and unfair fighting at some point in their lives. Children learn it early on and just get better at making it appear more civilized as they grow up. Those who see themselves as victims are especially prone to it as they use a form of guilt and manipulation to get their needs met as opposed to those who do so more directly through force. Take a look at Musk's wiki page, it is an interesting read on his own background that will obviously have some impact on how he handles himself today. Some people here I think need to stop looking at him as Musk, the billionaire and see him as Musk the human being. 

[Rowan Amore]

2 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

You seem to be stretching credibility

Stretching is putting it mildly.  Very first entry on searching the word pedo...doesn't seem ambiguous to me.   Oxford dictionary and NOT urban dictionary ffs.  There were many other things he could have called him and he chose this?  

pedo

[ˈpēdō]

NOUN

informal

derogatory

a person who is sexually attracted to children

[Ceka Cianci]

I'm just really glad I don't have a twitter account more and more now.. It's one place I'm really glad I don't have a dog in the fight.

hehehe

 

[Arielle Popstar]

7 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

Do you realise the definition you are going by is on page 3 of the list and has almost twice as many down votes as it does positive ones?

Urban dictionary is not really what I would have thought was a particularly reliable source in the first place, but picking the fifteenth definition to make your point seems like clutching at straws.

You seem to be stretching credibility quite some way, do you really believe what you are arguing or are you just trolling? 

We can't use the standard dictionary meaning of pedo as it is no more then a prefix. The page I did link on the urban dictionary validated my point that it is used by various people's (aside from South Africans) as a insult with a slightly humorous bias to it. 

Stretching credibility and trolling is looking for the best in people? One can always find something wrong in others if one stretches their own credibility enough.

[StarlanderGoods]

10 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

We can't use the standard dictionary meaning of pedo as it is no more then a prefix. The page I did link on the urban dictionary validated my point that it is used by various people's (aside from South Africans) as a insult with a slightly humorous bias to it. 

Stretching credibility and trolling is looking for the best in people? One can always find something wrong in others if one stretches their own credibility enough.

Okay, you searched, but after the evidence that was presented to you, do you need to keep searching? Or can you accept that the man is not flawless and in this particular situation he messed up big time.  Because hiring someone to dig up dirt, that´s extremely petty, and it clears all the doubts about what he really meant.

So, give us this one, it´s as black and white as you can get with this guy.

[Paulsian]

I have a Paulsian Theory, The world is ending or we are being visited / evacuated and this is the only way he can communicate with the world, before the govs would ever let that happen they would cut power but tesla will be lne step ahead of that. 

[Paulsian]

or star trek theory he will use twitter to beam us up

[Paulsian]

or the alice in wonderland theory.

Edited April 28, 2022 by Paulsian
i mean borderland

[AnthonyJoanne]

6 hours ago, Lindal Kidd said:

According to the Urban Dictionary (I agree with this definition, but they said it better than I could):

"To cancel someone (usually a celebrity or other well-known figure) means to stop giving support to that person. The act of canceling could entail boycotting an actor's movies or no longer reading or promoting a writer's works."

 

 

Not really sure about that definition.

Choosing not to support someone is not necessarily an attempt to cancel them.

I've given it a lot of thought, attempting to come up with an example which won't derail the thread, but I simply cannot think of a real world case where someone might not step in to defend something that I think poorly of. So I've invented a fictional scenario. I am NOT just changing names ... I'm inventing this from whole cloth. In fact I'm going to include the disclaimer:

This work is fiction. Any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental.

Fred Nurk is an author. Fred has written a number of books over the years. The first few weren't anything special, but eventually he wrote a novel that many consider brilliant. It became incredibly popular. He wrote another novel and it too was a big seller and very popular. That continued for several more novels. Fred is frequently discussed in online forums and widely regarded as an excellent writer and aside from a few who don't like his work, everyone is looking forward to his next novel.

Fred releases his next novel. It sells very well, initially. But the general reception from the public is much less enthusiastic. Fred has changed his writing style, and has moved in a different direction creatively. Some people are wildly enthusiastic about the change(s). Others are not. Opinion on the forums is split ... with many of his fans expressing disappointment with the new novel.

Fred releases another novel. This novel continues with the new writing style and creative direction as seen in the previous book. Opinion on the forums is still split.

Many people have announced that they are no longer going to buy his books, and recommend that people not 'waste their money' on his future writing.

By the terms of that definition ... that constitutes an attempt to cancel Fred. But that's not canceling.

(Technically the term should be 'cancellation' ... but sadly the term 'canceling' is now in common mis-usage so I'll use it, even though it makes me wince)

Canceling is attempting to prevent publishers from publishing Fred's works. Canceling is turning up to Fred's book signings and attempting to disrupt them to prevent sales. Canceling is digging through Fred's history to find any spurious evidence that will support a claim that Fred is a 'bad person' and should be prevented from writing/publishing.

If I decide not to buy Fred's books, and tell people why, that's not canceling ... that's just me 'voting with my wallet' and being open about why I made that decision.

Why am I spamming a wall of text as to what really constitutes canceling?

Because twitter has been a primary mechanism for canceling for quite a while now. And some of the people who have the biggest problem with Musk buying twitter are the most egregious practitioners of canceling people. Organisations too. But I can't name them or we'll be into hot button topics.

 

 

[Lindal Kidd]

I appreciate @AnthonyJoanne's critique of the "cancellation" definition and concede their point. Cancellation, in its new meaning (to me, it used to mean stopping a magazine subscription!) includes an implied retaliatory intent. It's not just stopping support of someone because you no longer like, need, or want their product. It's retaliation for an expressed point of view, an attempt to "make them pay" for their position.

[Silent Mistwalker]

41 minutes ago, AnthonyJoanne said:

This work is fiction. Any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental.

Fred Nurk is an author. Fred has written a number of books over the years. The first few weren't anything special, but eventually he wrote a novel that many consider brilliant. It became incredibly popular. He wrote another novel and it too was a big seller and very popular. That continued for several more novels. Fred is frequently discussed in online forums and widely regarded as an excellent writer and aside from a few who don't like his work, everyone is looking forward to his next novel.

Fred releases his next novel. It sells very well, initially. But the general reception from the public is much less enthusiastic. Fred has changed his writing style, and has moved in a different direction creatively. Some people are wildly enthusiastic about the change(s). Others are not. Opinion on the forums is split ... with many of his fans expressing disappointment with the new novel.

Fred releases another novel. This novel continues with the new writing style and creative direction as seen in the previous book. Opinion on the forums is still split.

 

I included your disclaimer for a reason.

You may not know it, but you just described exactly what happened to Anne Rice when she stopped writing about vampires and started writing Christian novels instead. Most of her fans stopped reading her books. She did finally go back to writing vampire novels. She passed away last December at age 80.

[Coffee Pancake]

2 hours ago, AnthonyJoanne said:

If I decide not to buy Fred's books, and tell people why, that's not canceling ... that's just me 'voting with my wallet' and being open about why I made that decision.

and is also free speech .. 

Those who get most upset about "cancel culture" really seem more interested in trying to silence opposing voices, as though people shouldn't be allowed to call others or companies out.

Tech companies have very clear rules about what they permit on their platforms and breaking those rules results in consequences.

It's not cancel culture when people report someone for violating a platforms rules, nor is their speech impeded should the platform show them the door. Especially when the "silenced" person tends to immediately show up on another platform to broadcast their silence to millions.

2 hours ago, Lindal Kidd said:

It's retaliation for an expressed point of view, an attempt to "make them pay" for their position.

It might be .. if it actually worked. But it doesn't.

The only difference now is everyone has access to platforms that place their voices on a more equal footing. Before social media, only the powerful and well connected had a voice.

Edited April 28, 2022 by Coffee Pancake
typo

[Istelathis]

45 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Especially when the "silenced" person tends to immediately show up on another platform to broadcast their silence to millions.

Hey now, some people make quite the living doing this.  Stop trying to cancel them by bringing awareness of how they profit off cancel culture!  

Edited April 28, 2022 by Istelathis

[CaithLynnSayes]

🤣🤣🤣

Edited April 28, 2022 by CaithLynnSayes

[Istelathis]

Unfortunately, with the hundreds of thousands that follow Elon Musk, his Cocaine in Coke joke will be met with some resistance, I mean it will be small, as in perhaps a few dozen or perhaps even a couple hundred comments scrutinizing him - but that is certainly enough to convince others that he is a victim and that there is an agenda against him.  Certainly, a few of the "mainstream" media outlets will make a story of it.  It works out really well for him, and then he can proceed to generalize everyone that does not support him as being overly critical.

The majority of the comments will be just people laughing at the foolishness of it all though.  The guy is great at this game.

Edited April 28, 2022 by Istelathis

[CaithLynnSayes]

3 minutes ago, Istelathis said:

Unfortunately, with the hundreds of thousands that follow Elon Musk, his Cocaine in Coke joke will be met with some resistance, I mean it will be small, as in perhaps a few dozen or perhaps even a couple hundred comments securitizing him - but that is certainly enough to convince others that he is a victim and that there is an agenda against him.  Certainly, a few of the "mainstream" media outlets will make a story of it.  It works out really well for him, and then he can proceed to generalize everyone that does not support him as being overly critical.

The majority of the comments will be just people laughing at the foolishness of it all though.  The guy is great at this game.

Well, it's a joke... Remember those things? Made to make people laugh.

[Istelathis]

17 minutes ago, CaithLynnSayes said:

Well, it's a joke... Remember those things? Made to make people laugh.

No, the liberal media has completely removed my ability to appreciate comedy - now my only purpose is to cancel others.  

Edited April 28, 2022 by Istelathis

[SarahKB7 Koskinen]

 

It's not "could care less", which is meaningless nonsense and also possibly a double-negative.

The correct reply should have been "could NOT care less", as David Mitchell will now explain....

😜

Edited April 28, 2022 by SarahKB7 Koskinen

[Scylla Rhiadra]

33 minutes ago, CaithLynnSayes said:

🤣🤣🤣

I very much hope that the proceeding comment was his confirmation that he was buying Twitter to put the "twit" back in?

[Istelathis]

11 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I very much hope that the proceeding comment was his confirmation that he was buying Twitter to put the "twit" back in?

It could mean just about anything,  he will likely just go with whatever is the most well received, as he is playing 4d chess at this time.  

[Mollymews]

12 hours ago, Innula Zenovka said:

Reuters are already suggesting he might be getting cold feet.

https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/elon-musk-probably-wont-buy-twitter-2022-04-27/

yes. I will not be surprised at all if the deal doesn't finalise. It doesn't make any sense for Elon Musk to buy it. Is not a good financial proposition at the price and buying Twitter doesn't solve his other issue which grates on him as a person

as part of the settlement with DOJ over his tweet about taking Tesla private, Mr Musk also had to agree that any further tweets about Tesla (being a public company) that could affect the company share price, has to be prior cleared by a Tesla attorney

buying Twitter doesn't change the settlement terms that restricts Mr Musk from tweeting whatever he likes about Tesla or any of the other public companies that he may be invested in

recently he was in court to have this part of the agreement nullified and the judge said no, as in the agreement Mr Musk simply acknowledged his fiduciary responsibility as a  officer of a public company

 

[Ceka Cianci]

4 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I very much hope that the proceeding comment was his confirmation that he was buying Twitter to put the "twit" back in?

I've heard that it's about putting it back to the way it was before it became so out of hand..

Whatever that means.. I never used it so I don't know what it was like..

I picture it something  like, Hey bro what U doin.

Not much.

K.

lol

Eggplant.

 

hehehehe

 

[Coffee Pancake]

18 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

 

recently he was in court to have this part of the agreement nullified and the judge said no, as in the agreement Mr Musk simply acknowledged his fiduciary responsibility as a  officer of a public company

 

He was also in court over the shenanigans that went down with Solar City.

https://www.reuters.com/business/judge-rules-elon-musk-tesla-investor-lawsuit-over-solarcity-deal-2022-04-27/