Elon Musk Buys Twitter

[Endus]

The corrosion of public discourse is a broad topic, but I'd absolutely include trying to brand political disagreement as being just talking points and bad faith. Discourse is cheapened when partisan activists try to lock down discourse they feel is illegitimate.

I've asked conservatives repeatedly in multiple threads to boil their views down to basic, objective principles.

I've literally never gotten an honest, good-faith interaction when I make such a request.

If you can't identify base principles, and those base principles can't withstand objective scrutiny, then your position is illegitimate. Your position is entirely rooted in "talking points and bad faith", not principle. I'm perfectly willing to play this game myself, by the by. Pick a subject, ask me about my relevant base principles, and I'll freely give you a list of things like "respect every indiviudal's human dignity" or "pursue justice wherever possible".

So I'll issue that challenge again; what are your base political principles/ideals that inform your position on Elon's abuse of his position on this matter?

Here's mine, pre-emptively; it violates the "Harm Principle" by unfairly suppressing objectively true statements that are only found objectionable by determinably harmful bigots who incorrectly project their own abuse of the term "trans" by using it as a slur, and presume that the opposite term "cis" must also be a slur, when the reality is neither are slurs and only one group are being harmful and abusive here; the bigots and Musk.

The way to solve the current problems in public discussion of topics of political importance is more speech and more journalism, including journalistic fact-checking and fact-checking the fact-checkers, not going on fascism witch-hunts and labeling sprees. I'd call your post "Big Brother will free you from the corrosive spread of malinformation."

And you'd be lying. Musk is literally acting as Big Brother here, redefining words to eliminate their semantic content. You've either never actually read 1984, or you're willing to lie about what's going on to push your political agenda (see "talking points and bad faith".)

[NED funded]

Didn't he literally unban all the nazis?

I think he unbanned everyone in general

[Endus]

I think he unbanned everyone in general

That's just a "yes" with you trying to weasel around acknowledging that.

[Elder Millennial]

I think he unbanned everyone in general

Except lefties. People who insult him and that kid who dared track his plane.

Kek.

[Edge-]

I think he unbanned everyone in general

Including the nazis, yeah?

[unfilteredJW]

IIRC, he took sudden steps against the account because one of his kids was directly involved IRL as a result.

I can completely understand that POV.

Yeah, you are a hypocritical bigot. So of course you understand another’s POV.

[NED funded]

In my opinion NOBODY is a free speech absolutist because there are always limits to how much stupid shit people will say, and individuals that will be that example.

People say they are free speech absolutist are free speech absolutist until they realized someone finally said something they legitimately disagree with.

More than legitimately disagree Id add disgust. It's not just enough that you disagree with the message, but it has to repulse you.

It's weird to see ppl argue that the government should take a hard stance on speech or actions based on how disgusted they are by it. From evangelical paranoia about devil worship to calling anyone that disagrees with leftist woke nonsense bigots, it all stems from disgust.

[Edge-]

IIRC, he took sudden steps against the account because one of his kids was directly involved IRL as a result.

I can completely understand that POV.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-ne...lker-rcna62664

I don't believe we have more recent reporting on this, but this is why you shouldn't believe a narcissistic, pathological liar. Which you've been repeatedly told and shown. Yet here you are, still doing the same thing.

[NED funded]

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-ne...lker-rcna62664

I don't believe we have more recent reporting on this, but this is why you shouldn't believe a narcissistic, pathological liar. Which you've been repeatedly told and shown. Yet here you are, still doing the same thing.

The car’s renter, Brandon Collado, confirmed in interviews with The Post that he was the person shown in the video. He also provided The Post with videos he shot of Musk’s security guard that matched the one Musk had posted to Twitter.

In his conversations with The Post, Collado acknowledged he has an interest in Musk and the mother of two of Musk’s children, the musician known as Grimes, whose real name is Claire Elise Boucher. Boucher lives in a house near the gas station.

In his communications with The Post, Collado, who said he was a driver for Uber Eats, also made several bizarre and unsupported claims, including that he believed Boucher was sending him coded messages through her Instagram posts; that Musk was monitoring his real-time location; and that Musk could control Uber Eats to block him from receiving delivery orders. He said he was in Boucher’s neighborhood to work for Uber Eats.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/techn...king-incident/

uuuhhhh......

I mean sure but this doesnt look good for the guy

[DarkTZeratul]

I’m not seeing anything confirmed, just the article saying it’s being investigated and that the Washington Post did an article on the man claiming to be the driver (which wasn’t found?), and that he had some obsession with the family (Grimes).

Musk said the guy knew his family would be there because of the tracking account?

Seems entirely reasonable response from Musk

“At no time during the incident did the victim identify the suspect or indicate the altercation was anything more than coincidental," police said.

Musk is wrong. Either he's paranoid and thinks everyone's out to get him personally, or he knew it had nothing to do with it and used it as pretense to shut down something that had annoyed him for years despite being perfectly legal because all it's doing is displaying public data.

[Edge-]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/techn...king-incident/

uuuhhhh......

I mean sure but this doesnt look good for the guy

Who were the police looking into as a suspect again, per the article I linked?

[Edge-]

I mean, I’d be okay with him shutting the thing down either way. He’s a parent. He’s paranoid. His son and GF were in direct danger.

He claims, which is not supported by the police comment.

What’s he do? Instead of waiting for an on-going investigation, he cuts the head of the snake — tracking his airplane on his platform.

Not let his paranoid, overactive imagination take over his brain and create fictional reality.

Papa Bear shit. I respect that.

No, this is just unhinged. Weird that you view it so positively.

Actually not weird at all based on your posting.

[Mekh]

Reminder, Musk banned the plane tracker kid, but not the guy who got a bunch of bomb and murder threats sent to a children's hospital.

[Edge-]

Absolutely. His kid was directly in danger and he reacted like a parent would.

He claims*

I can claim I think my kid is in danger before sucker punching some random person who was just walking by me. Would that be PAPA BEAR SHIT or me just being an unhinged nutter assaulting someone?

Good on him. Fuck that guy tracking his plane that Musk’s kids could be on. As a parent, I’d shut his ass down too. Call it purely emotional and irrational. I call it being a good dad.

Gotcha, so you're not actually interested in discussion at all. Thanks.

[Benggaul]

I think he unbanned everyone in general

Hi! No, he didn't. I was banned long before his takeover for correctly identifying Ann Coulter as a heartless cunt and remained banned afterwards despite him opening the floodgates to actual hate speech. So no, it wasn't a blanket unban, it was just for a specific subset of Nazis and bigots.

[Santti]

Absolutely. His kid was directly in danger and he reacted like a parent would.

Good on him. Fuck that guy tracking his plane that Musk’s kids could be on. As a parent, I’d shut his ass down too. Call it purely emotional and irrational. I call it being a good dad.

What danger though, and what of it has been prevented? That flight data that was apparently so dangerous, is publicly available information. He just happened to post it on Twitter. I'm sure you can find the exact same info on some other platforms as well, so it's not like banning him really did anything. Other than drawing people's attention to it, that is. Like us here, right now.

[Benggaul]

Gotcha, so you're not actually interested in discussion at all. Thanks.

Given their past posts on how they treat/relate to their children they don't know the first thing about "good parenting" in any case.

[Endus]

More than legitimately disagree Id add disgust. It's not just enough that you disagree with the message, but it has to repulse you.

It's weird to see ppl argue that the government should take a hard stance on speech or actions based on how disgusted they are by it. From evangelical paranoia about devil worship to calling anyone that disagrees with leftist woke nonsense bigots, it all stems from disgust.

The Harm Principle isn't that complicated a philosophical concept.

And when what you call "leftist woke nonsense" is shit like "trans people existing without state persecution", you're being a fascist who's seeking to commit genocide, but simultaneously too emotionally fragile to handle someone pointing that out to you.

Absolutely. His kid was directly in danger and he reacted like a parent would.

Being "directly in danger" would mean someone was literally in the process of putting his child at risk in that moment.

That was not the case. So you're lying.

Good on him. Fuck that guy tracking his plane that Musk’s kids could be on. As a parent, I’d shut his ass down too. Call it purely emotional and irrational. I call it being a good dad.

Well, you're wrong. Lots of abusive people think they're "good parents", even while beating their kids bloody, forcing them to remain closeted or face abandonment, emotionally abusing them "for their own good", and so on. Your personal opinion of your own actions is not a defense.

[Benggaul]

Honestly, I dunno if I've just been blind for a few years, but it feels like she was hacked and a totally different person is posting on her account.

It's been building for years but definitely became apparent during COVID and their "Enough with the restrictions already! Think of the children!" whining.

[NED funded]

The Harm Principle isn't that complicated a philosophical concept.

And when what you call "leftist woke nonsense" is shit like "trans people existing without state persecution", you're being a fascist who's seeking to commit genocide, but simultaneously too emotionally fragile to handle someone pointing that out to you.

Its literally against the rules of this website to discuss anything specific about lgbt stuff and you know this. Not sure why you keep bringing it out and trying to bait them into talking about it.

Instead of LGTB issues Ill talk about something else:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_integrity_dysphoria

This is a very specific disorder in which ppl think their limbs need to be cut off. Would you agree that doctors should comply and cut their limbs off so their bodies can match the mental picture they have in their brains?

Its not so cut and dry. Its fine to have a discussion on whats acceptable.