Elon Musk Buys Twitter

[Endus]

Yes there doesn't need to be a lot of change because 95% of the moderation is reasonable and politically neutral. Twitter was starting to go in the wrong direction though which is why it's good that Musk got out ahead of this problem and nipped it in the bud. Now leftists won't be able to get control of Twitter moderation going forward.

And yet, you wouldn't be able to demonstrate a single example of that 5%. It's a persecution complex that exists entirely in the heads of far-right extremists.

[Elegiac]

And yet, you wouldn't be able to demonstrate a single example of that 5%. It's a persecution complex that exists entirely in the heads of far-right extremists.

The honestly hilarious thing is how people pretending to be "concerned independents" like @PC2 spent 95% of their time bitching about 'leftists' whose goals include such horrific things as universal healthcare and sustainable environmental policy and next to no time bitching about 'rightists' whose goals revolve around the oppression and erasure of entire demographics based on skin color or sexual orientation.

It's almost as if they're actually right-wing clowns constantly arguing from a position of bad faith because they can.

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

[PC2]

The honestly hilarious thing is how people pretending to be "concerned independents" like @PC2 spent 95% of their time bitching about 'leftists' whose goals include such horrific things as universal healthcare and sustainable environmental policy

I never claimed to be an independent. I'm definitely biased towards conservativism in the sense that I think the neoliberal status quo will deliver objectively better results than the left/right alternatives over the long run, and my goal is to convince people of this with data.

next to no time bitching about 'rightists' whose goals revolve around the oppression and erasure of entire demographics based on skin color or sexual orientation.

Well they don't have most of the political power and back when the right wing did have more power around 5 years ago society was bitching about Trump non-stop. That kind of criticism already has plenty of representation.

It's almost as if they're actually right-wing clowns constantly arguing from a position of bad faith because they can.

I'm not sure what the point is here but I think anti-Semites(on the left or right) are mostly just jealous of the fact that Jews tend to contribute more to civilization(per capita) than other ethnic groups.

[Elegiac]

I never claimed to be an independent. I'm definitely biased towards conservativism in the sense that I think the neoliberal status quo will deliver objectively better results than the left/right alternatives over the long run, and my goal is to convince people of this with data.

And yet you never provide any data unless it's from a highly biased source like the Cato Institute. Shocker.

Moreover, conservatism is right wing.

Well they don't have most of the political power and back when the right wing did have more power around 5 years ago society was bitching about Trump non-stop. That kind of criticism already has plenty of representation.

The right wing absolutely does have most of the political power in the US, habibi.

Nor is "there's plenty of criticism" an excuse to take the opposite tack when the reason for there being plenty of criticism is because there isn't parity between 'leftists' and 'rightists'. You're just arguing in bad faith.

I'm not sure what the point is here

The point is that people like yourself and Musk are entirely aware how ridiculous your replies to any given subject actually are and engage in them primarily as a form of personal amusement and then proceed to simply run away with your tail between your legs when you're actually backed into a corner - see your refusal to acknowledge any of the replies to your bullshit statements about billionaires. Rofl.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I never claimed to be an independent. I'm definitely biased towards conservativism in the sense that I think the neoliberal status quo will deliver objectively better results than the left/right alternatives over the long run, and my goal is to convince people of this with data.

Yet you ignore any data that doesn't fit with your beliefs.

[Endus]

I never claimed to be an independent. I'm definitely biased towards conservativism in the sense that I think the neoliberal status quo will deliver objectively better results than the left/right alternatives over the long run, and my goal is to convince people of this with data.

And yet, you never provide data. And reject data whenever it's presented debunking the nonsense you push.

[cubby]

The honestly hilarious thing is how people pretending to be "concerned independents" like @PC2 spent 95% of their time bitching about 'leftists' whose goals include such horrific things as universal healthcare and sustainable environmental policy and next to no time bitching about 'rightists' whose goals revolve around the oppression and erasure of entire demographics based on skin color or sexual orientation.

It's almost as if they're actually right-wing clowns constantly arguing from a position of bad faith because they can.

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

This is the entire thrust of the conservative/GQP position strategy. They know they are ridiculous, and don't actually care about any kind of reasonable debate or discussion, because reasonableness is antithetical to their position. And the ignorant, stupid, and easily manipulated are their audience. Because their stupidity is rewarded with fanfare and despotism and pain and suffering.

[Endus]

And the ignorant, stupid, and easily manipulated are their audience. Because their stupidity is rewarded with fanfare and despotism and pain and suffering.

Look at basically any of those supporting these people. Whether they're stupid or not is irrelevant, because stupidity isn't what's leading them to support this stuff. They aren't misled, or deluded. The malicious outcomes are what they want. The key identifier isn't stupidity, it's malice. The despotism, pain, and suffering isn't being led in under the guise of some nascent good; it's the central feature that's convinced these people to align along that axis.

These aren't poor, ignorant fools being led unwitting down a dark path. These are villagers grabbing pitchforks and torches because they want to murder some people who don't belong, for the joy of doing so and not much else.

[postman1782]

Yes there doesn't need to be a lot of change because 95% of the moderation is reasonable and politically neutral. Twitter was starting to go in the wrong direction though which is why it's good that Musk got out ahead of this problem and nipped it in the bud. Now leftists won't be able to get control of Twitter moderation going forward.

Prove it, tell me how they are going in the wrong fucking direction. Don't tell me the same old bullshit line that they are the "town square" and that free speech should be there, you don't get that with anyone but the fucking government. It isn't like they are banning people for being conservative solely. I know, I have had 4 accounts banned from Twitter.

I want proof that that anything bad is happening.

[Flarelaine]

I love the sense of resignation here. "Well, if our actions cause the coastal areas to flood we'll just move inland! And then those coastal areas will flood so we'll move more inland again. And then when there's no arable land left we'll be moving off into the stars. The future is filled with infinite possibilities, none of which include humanity failing to act and making earth largely uninhabitable for our species."

That's not what he wrote, though. And I'm certainly ready to believe that with Florida's lax building standards, decay will take coastal property before the sea can.

[Edge-]

Elon Musk Says Twitter Will Comply With EU Content Rules After Takeover

So much for the Freeze Peach paradise. Now it's gonna be Eurocucked. PULL TWITTER OUT OF EUROPE AND MAKE IT AMERICAN ONLY SO WE CAN HAVE OUR FREEZE PEACH!

I'm sure Musk was very nice, because I'm still pretty darned sure he's gonna try to get outta the deal before it closes.

[Edge-]

Elon Musk flip flops more than anyone I've ever seen. I swear its only a day or so since he basically said "Trump is exclusive to Truth Social, he doesn't need his Twitter account" or something.

I wish media wouldn't be so easily manipulated with non-news (is this really news and not painfully expected?) while Elon keeps feeding his ego and being the center of attention.

I do wonder what he'll do to stay in the global spotlight when he backs outta this. Probably cry about leftists ruining his acquisition of Twitter or something.

[Endus]

Elon Musk flip flops more than anyone I've ever seen. I swear its only a day or so since he basically said "Trump is exclusive to Truth Social, he doesn't need his Twitter account" or something.

It's not even that he flip flops. He's like Trump. He says a lot of absolute shit he has no reason to believe or support, and doesn't give enough of a shit to even keep track of the bullshit he's said to try and stick to it. He's exactly like Trump in that regard.

Flip flopping would require he actually believed and dedicated effort to the first idea before changing his mind.

[cubby]

Elon Musk says he would reverse Twitter's Trump ban.

This is how Trump's 2024 campaign will start. Trump himself said during the 2016 campaign that he couldn't believe how amazing Twitter and social media was for free advertising. And he was right - more than $2B was attributed to his social media posts, predominantly on Twitter.

[Fantomen]

So much for the Freeze Peach paradise. Now it's gonna be Eurocucked. PULL TWITTER OUT OF EUROPE AND MAKE IT AMERICAN ONLY SO WE CAN HAVE OUR FREEZE PEACH!

Why? All Twitter have to do is put up a "censor box" This coment are not allowed to be shown in EU becuse of "EU Hate speech law paragraf 1.4 and 2.1" in EU, and show the comment in US, that do not have a "hate speech law"

As long the speech is legal it shall be allowed. Do we have to take the whole "shooting fire in a cinema" vs free speech discussion?

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Elon Musk flip flops more than anyone I've ever seen. I swear its only a day or so since he basically said "Trump is exclusive to Truth Social, he doesn't need his Twitter account" or something.

The thing I find interesting about the quote is that Musk, and others, have long proclaimed that Twitter is the "Marketplace of Ideas" and it is therefore integral to "free Speech". By saying Trump doesn't need a Twitter Account because he's on Truth Social...he's flying directly in the face of that logic.

[unfilteredJW]

Why? All Twitter have to do is put up a "censor box" This coment are not allowed to be shown in EU becuse of "EU Hate speech law paragraf 1.4 and 2.1" in EU, and show the comment in US, that do not have a "hate speech law"

As long the speech is legal it shall be allowed. Do we have to take the whole "shooting fire in a cinema" vs free speech discussion?

No, because you guys that learned what free speech is from the YouTube comment section never learn anything from that discussion.

[Paranoid Android]

Unbanning Trump on Twitter: Elon Musk’s Full Explanation

Just FML! This idiot don't get it but we know where his bias lies and again once more time why the right loves him.

Campbell: Are you planning to let Donald Trump back on [Twitter]?

Musk: Well, I think there’s a general question of, should Twitter have permanent bans? And, you know, I’ve talked with Jack Dorsey about this, and he and I are of the same mind which is that permanent bans should be extremely rare and really reserved for people where they’re trying to, for accounts that are bots or spam or scam accounts, where there’s just no legitimacy to the account at all.

I do think that it was not correct to ban Donald Trump. I think that was a mistake because it alienated a large part of the country and did not ultimately resolve Donald Trump not having a voice. He is now going to be on Truth Social, as will a large part of the, sort of the right in the United States. And so, I think this could end up being frankly worse than having a single forum where everyone can debate.

So, I guess the answer is that I would reverse the permaban. I’ll say I’m not… I don’t own Twitter yet, so this is not like a thing that will definitely happen because what if I don’t own Twitter. But my opinion, and Jack Dorsey, I want to be clear, shares this opinion, is that we should not have permabans.

Now, that doesn’t mean that somebody gets to say whatever they wanted to say. If they say something that is illegal or otherwise is just destructive to the world, then that, there should be perhaps a timeout, a temporary suspension, or that particular tweet should be made invisible or have very limited traction. But, I think permabans just fundamentally undermine Twitter as a town square where everyone can voice their opinion.

I think it was a morally bad decision, to be clear, and foolish in the extreme.

Campbell: Even after he egged on the crowd who went to the U.S. Capitol, some of them carrying nooses? You still think it was a mistake to remove him?

Musk: I think the, if there are tweets that are wrong, they should, and bad, those should be either deleted or made invisible. And a suspension, a temporary suspension, is appropriate. But not a permanent ban.

Campbell: So if the deal completes, he might potentially come back on, but with the understanding that if he does something again, he’ll be back in the [inaudible].

Musk: He has publicly stated that he will not be coming back to Twitter, and that he will only be on Truth Social. And this is the point that I’m trying to make, which is perhaps not getting across, which is that banning Trump from Twitter didn’t end Trump‘s voice. It will amplify it among the right. And this is why it is morally wrong and flat out stupid.

Okay I'll break down some of this which is just effin wrong on Musk's part.

I do think that it was not correct to ban Donald Trump. I think that was a mistake because it alienated a large part of the country and did not ultimately resolve Donald Trump not having a voice. He is now going to be on Truth Social, as will a large part of the, sort of the right in the United States. And so, I think this could end up being frankly worse than having a single forum where everyone can debate.

The alienate part of the country is classic, since I can argue Trump was easily doing this when YUNNO he was President and You Know when was inciting violence.

did not ultimately resolve Donald Trump not having a voice. He is now going to be on Truth Social

Actually it did. I wish it didn't but there was tons of stories how after Trump was banned the bot or even real people crying about the election when down by 60% on Twitter. So again banning a dude inciting a revolt, who happened to have power since You Know, Trump was Prez.

But my opinion, and Jack Dorsey, I want to be clear, shares this opinion, is that we should not have permabans.

So no permabans? What about the Hama leader promoting terrorism or I hate to bring this one up, George Zimmerman, who used it on his girlfriend for revenge porn?. I believe out of all there are only 22 accounts permabanned. So this is a issue?

Now, that doesn’t mean that somebody gets to say whatever they wanted to say. If they say something that is illegal or otherwise is just destructive to the world, then that, there should be perhaps a timeout, a temporary suspension, or that particular tweet should be made invisible or have very limited traction. But, I think permabans just fundamentally undermine Twitter as a town square where everyone can voice their opinion.

I mean WTF?! This says it right here and again I will link why Trump was suspended. They concluded him saying the election was not legit and encouraging what happened on Jan 6th and not going to the Inauguration.

Campbell: Even after he egged on the crowd who went to the U.S. Capitol, some of them carrying nooses? You still think it was a mistake to remove him?

Musk: I think the, if there are tweets that are wrong, they should, and bad, those should be either deleted or made invisible. And a suspension, a temporary suspension, is appropriate. But not a permanent ban.

So we believe if Trump's tweets were ghosted he would not retweet it? Better yet, this guy would effin cry so hard that it was, wait for it?????? Censorism!

[Zan15]

[But my opinion, and Jack Dorsey, I want to be clear, shares this opinion, is that we should not have permabans.

LOL guess they won't be permabanning those people who post illegal pictures of children.
Gotta let them back on to do it again for free speech and all.....

[Elegiac]

I like how at no point in his rambling does he actually explain why permabans are a bad thing; just endlessly restating that "they shouldn't exist because reasons."