Twitter likely to take idiots offer to buy them for $43 billion

[Trausti]

Oh noes.

 

[Hermit]

Musk is African-American.

Musk is not an African-American.

African American: "an ethnic group consisting of Americans with partial or total ancestry from any of the black racial groups of Africa.[3][4] The term "African American" generally denotes descendants of enslaved Africans who are from the United States."

Elon Musk: "born to a Canadian mother and White South African father"

 

[RVonse]

If Twitter isn't guilty of widespread censorship, then Musk's plans to open it up won't make a difference, will it? Why so upset?

The fundamental problem is that as it stands Twitter bans the calls for violence and the like and bans bots as they can be identified. They're trying to keep the place clean. Opening it up means welcoming the trash, it will quickly turn into a hatefest and that will tend to drive others away.

If you consider someone else's opinion trash then I agree with you. But according to Musk, he pledges to follow the laws this country already in place (with regard to yelling fire in a theater) and if there is a grey area he says he will let the post stand. And if he is telling the truth, it sounds great to me. That being said, I am not bothered by people who have different opinions than I do. I welcome hearing the other side.

 

[Trausti]

Musk is African-American.

Musk is not an African-American.

African American: "an ethnic group consisting of Americans with partial or total ancestry from any of the black racial groups of Africa.[3][4] The term "African American" generally denotes descendants of enslaved Africans who are from the United States."

Elon Musk: "born to a Canadian mother and White South African father"

LOL. He was born in Africa. His father was born in Africa. And his father, etc. Are you saying that Idris Elba is not English/British?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I think what I've learned the most with the Musk-Twitter deal is that "censorship" has become the latest victim of the alt-right, who continues to willfully desecrate the Dictionary.

 

[RVonse]

The fundamental problem is that as it stands Twitter bans the calls for violence and the like and bans bots as they can be identified.

They ban a lot more than calls for violence and bots. They will generally suspend accounts for voicing politically incorrect opinions.

They're trying to keep the place clean. Opening it up means welcoming the trash, it will quickly turn into a hatefest and that will tend to drive others away.

There should be a way to keep it clean of bots and threats of violence without censoring speech just because it may be offensive to some. Or moderating in a politically biased way. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition - either have an overly and inconsistently moderated mess (like Twitter as of now) or else have no moderation at all.

We will see if Musk does what he says he is going to do. Personally, I think he is telling the truth. But in any case, the left has no authority whatsoever to tell Musk what free speech is. Musk is right about twitter censoring a then current POTUS off the platform. If that isn't a violation of free speech I don't know what is. Tha'ts when twitter decided the comments from a government official half the population voted for could not be made public. If that's not taking away free speech I don't know what is.

Maybe it will become better now, we will see.

 

[Trausti]

I think what I've learned the most with the Musk-Twitter deal is that "censorship" has become the latest victim of the alt-right, who continues to willfully desecrate the Dictionary.

Yes! It's never censorship when the wrong people are muted. They're the wrong people, FFS. You don't won't to be wrong, do you?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The fundamental problem is that as it stands Twitter bans the calls for violence and the like and bans bots as they can be identified.

They ban a lot more than calls for violence and bots. They will generally suspend accounts for voicing politically incorrect opinions.

They're trying to keep the place clean. Opening it up means welcoming the trash, it will quickly turn into a hatefest and that will tend to drive others away.

There should be a way to keep it clean of bots and threats of violence without censoring speech just because it may be offensive to some. Or moderating in a politically biased way. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition - either have an overly and inconsistently moderated mess (like Twitter as of now) or else have no moderation at all.

We will see if Musk does what he says he is going to do. Personally, I think he is telling the truth. But in any case, the left has no authority whatsoever to tell Musk what free speech is. Musk is right about twitter censoring a then current POTUS off the platform. If that isn't a violation of free speech I don't know what is.

The alt-right is angry that a man who incited a riot (in part on Twitter) that caused the evacuation of the Capitol Bldg was banned from Twitter. Twitter let Trump get away with posting endless amounts of shit. It wasn't until people were dying at the Capitol Bldg did they turn off the tap.This isn't a Left thing. This shouldn't even have been a debate!

 

[Trausti]

It doesn't matter what you think of it; it was a factual news story that was purposefully suppressed.

What was supressed? Come on, don't be coy.

Twitter and Facebook banned a New York Post story about Hunter Biden because, at the time, they claimed it was based on unverifiable facts.

You probably were unaware of this, as were many US citizens (including me) at the time, because you are not suffering from TDS nor are you a batshit crazy Republican.

+1. 'cause Twitter doesn't allow news stories until it has verified the facts. Like Russian bounties.

 

[RVonse]

The fundamental problem is that as it stands Twitter bans the calls for violence and the like and bans bots as they can be identified.

They ban a lot more than calls for violence and bots. They will generally suspend accounts for voicing politically incorrect opinions.

They're trying to keep the place clean. Opening it up means welcoming the trash, it will quickly turn into a hatefest and that will tend to drive others away.

There should be a way to keep it clean of bots and threats of violence without censoring speech just because it may be offensive to some. Or moderating in a politically biased way. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition - either have an overly and inconsistently moderated mess (like Twitter as of now) or else have no moderation at all.

We will see if Musk does what he says he is going to do. Personally, I think he is telling the truth. But in any case, the left has no authority whatsoever to tell Musk what free speech is. Musk is right about twitter censoring a then current POTUS off the platform. If that isn't a violation of free speech I don't know what is.

The alt-right is angry that a man who incited a riot (in part on Twitter) that caused the evacuation of the Capitol Bldg was banned from Twitter. Twitter let Trump get away with posting endless amounts of shit. It wasn't until people were dying at the Capitol Bldg did they turn off the tap.This isn't a Left thing. This shouldn't even have been a debate!

Assuming what you just said is true, Trump still had the right to voice his opinion if we are a free country. Because if you do not let him speak, just where do you draw the line? Tell him he can not hold a state of the union address too?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I think what I've learned the most with the Musk-Twitter deal is that "censorship" has become the latest victim of the alt-right, who continues to willfully desecrate the Dictionary.

Yes! It's never censorship when the wrong people are muted. They're the wrong people, FFS. You don't won't to be wrong, do you?

It is odd because last time I checked almost all GOP'ers have Twitter accounts.

 

[Trausti]

Social media companies literally banned a factual story on Hunter Biden’s laptop. Spare us your faux concern.

They banned a hoax, did they? Then why the fuck do I keep fucking hearing about it? Spare us your faux take on reality.

Yes, they banned a story of HB's laptop on the basis that they have rules against posting "hacked" material.

Hah.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The fundamental problem is that as it stands Twitter bans the calls for violence and the like and bans bots as they can be identified.

They ban a lot more than calls for violence and bots. They will generally suspend accounts for voicing politically incorrect opinions.

They're trying to keep the place clean. Opening it up means welcoming the trash, it will quickly turn into a hatefest and that will tend to drive others away.

There should be a way to keep it clean of bots and threats of violence without censoring speech just because it may be offensive to some. Or moderating in a politically biased way. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition - either have an overly and inconsistently moderated mess (like Twitter as of now) or else have no moderation at all.

We will see if Musk does what he says he is going to do. Personally, I think he is telling the truth. But in any case, the left has no authority whatsoever to tell Musk what free speech is. Musk is right about twitter censoring a then current POTUS off the platform. If that isn't a violation of free speech I don't know what is.

The alt-right is angry that a man who incited a riot (in part on Twitter) that caused the evacuation of the Capitol Bldg was banned from Twitter. Twitter let Trump get away with posting endless amounts of shit. It wasn't until people were dying at the Capitol Bldg did they turn off the tap.This isn't a Left thing. This shouldn't even have been a debate!

Assuming what you just said it true...

Assuming? What, that people died at The Capitol Bldg? That Trump egged the active riot on and said the VP failed him? That Trump held a insurrection rally just before all this happened? There is no assuming. That is what happened.

...Trump still had the right to voice his opinion if we are a free country.

There is no right to insurrection. In fact, THAT is written into the Constitution.

Because if you do not let him speak, just where do you draw the line?

At criminal acts.

 

[ZiprHead]

I think what I've learned the most with the Musk-Twitter deal is that "censorship" has become the latest victim of the alt-right, who continues to willfully desecrate the Dictionary.

Yes! It's never censorship when the wrong people are muted. They're the wrong people, FFS. You don't won't to be wrong, do you?

I get a kick out of the right complaining about censorship while they are banning and burning books, censoring teacher's speech, punishing Disney for exercising their right to free speech, and banning the true history of the United States in history classes.

 

[Trausti]

I think what I've learned the most with the Musk-Twitter deal is that "censorship" has become the latest victim of the alt-right, who continues to willfully desecrate the Dictionary.

Yes! It's never censorship when the wrong people are muted. They're the wrong people, FFS. You don't won't to be wrong, do you?

I get a kick out of the right complaining about censorship while they are banning and burning books, censoring teacher's speech, punishing Disney for exercising their right to free speech, and banning the true history of the United States in history classes.

You really can't differentiate between a compulsory captive audience and people who are free to leave/ignore?

 

[ZiprHead]

I think what I've learned the most with the Musk-Twitter deal is that "censorship" has become the latest victim of the alt-right, who continues to willfully desecrate the Dictionary.

Yes! It's never censorship when the wrong people are muted. They're the wrong people, FFS. You don't won't to be wrong, do you?

I get a kick out of the right complaining about censorship while they are banning and burning books, censoring teacher's speech, punishing Disney for exercising their right to free speech, and banning the true history of the United States in history classes.

You really can't differentiate between a compulsory captive audience and people who are free to leave/ignore?

Nice dodge.

 

[Trausti]

I think what I've learned the most with the Musk-Twitter deal is that "censorship" has become the latest victim of the alt-right, who continues to willfully desecrate the Dictionary.

Yes! It's never censorship when the wrong people are muted. They're the wrong people, FFS. You don't won't to be wrong, do you?

I get a kick out of the right complaining about censorship while they are banning and burning books, censoring teacher's speech, punishing Disney for exercising their right to free speech, and banning the true history of the United States in history classes.

You really can't differentiate between a compulsory captive audience and people who are free to leave/ignore?

Nice dodge.

No dodge. Unless parents have the monetary means for private school or homeschooling, they have to send their children to public schools. That is a captive audience. There is no "censoring teacher's speech." I know you understand that.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I think what I've learned the most with the Musk-Twitter deal is that "censorship" has become the latest victim of the alt-right, who continues to willfully desecrate the Dictionary.

Yes! It's never censorship when the wrong people are muted. They're the wrong people, FFS. You don't won't to be wrong, do you?

I get a kick out of the right complaining about censorship while they are banning and burning books, censoring teacher's speech, punishing Disney for exercising their right to free speech, and banning the true history of the United States in history classes.

You really can't differentiate between a compulsory captive audience and people who are free to leave/ignore?

Except the alt-right is censoring books, literally censoring. Not in a "this story smells like crap, and virtually no backup to the claims has been provided" moderation, but actual elimination from the schools. Actual legislation to ordain parents as overseers of teachers and limiting what teachers can and can't say. And most importantly, the alt-rights defense of Trump's incitement and egging on of the fascist storming of the US Capitol.

Actual censorship and political violence. Not merely holding back on reporting a story where Giuliani made lots of claims and provided virtually nothing to back up his claims.

 

[RVonse]

The fundamental problem is that as it stands Twitter bans the calls for violence and the like and bans bots as they can be identified.

They ban a lot more than calls for violence and bots. They will generally suspend accounts for voicing politically incorrect opinions.

They're trying to keep the place clean. Opening it up means welcoming the trash, it will quickly turn into a hatefest and that will tend to drive others away.

There should be a way to keep it clean of bots and threats of violence without censoring speech just because it may be offensive to some. Or moderating in a politically biased way. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition - either have an overly and inconsistently moderated mess (like Twitter as of now) or else have no moderation at all.

We will see if Musk does what he says he is going to do. Personally, I think he is telling the truth. But in any case, the left has no authority whatsoever to tell Musk what free speech is. Musk is right about twitter censoring a then current POTUS off the platform. If that isn't a violation of free speech I don't know what is.

The alt-right is angry that a man who incited a riot (in part on Twitter) that caused the evacuation of the Capitol Bldg was banned from Twitter. Twitter let Trump get away with posting endless amounts of shit. It wasn't until people were dying at the Capitol Bldg did they turn off the tap.This isn't a Left thing. This shouldn't even have been a debate!

Assuming what you just said it true...

Assuming? What, that people died at The Capitol Bldg? That Trump egged the active riot on and said the VP failed him? That Trump held a insurrection rally just before all this happened? There is no assuming. That is what happened.

...Trump still had the right to voice his opinion if we are a free country.

There is no right to insurrection. In fact, THAT is written into the Constitution.

Because if you do not let him speak, just where do you draw the line?

At criminal acts

Then a temporary suspension would still be the preference over a permanent ban.

By banning a POTUS who used your platform daily, twiiter attempted to tell the world what their political view should be.

 

[ZiprHead]

I think what I've learned the most with the Musk-Twitter deal is that "censorship" has become the latest victim of the alt-right, who continues to willfully desecrate the Dictionary.

Yes! It's never censorship when the wrong people are muted. They're the wrong people, FFS. You don't won't to be wrong, do you?

I get a kick out of the right complaining about censorship while they are banning and burning books, censoring teacher's speech, punishing Disney for exercising their right to free speech, and banning the true history of the United States in history classes.

You really can't differentiate between a compulsory captive audience and people who are free to leave/ignore?

Nice dodge.

No dodge. Unless parents have the monetary means for private school or homeschooling, they have to send their children to public schools. That is a captive audience. There is no "censoring teacher's speech." I know you understand that.

Never heard of charter schools?

They are also censoring books in public libraries. What the hell are you people so afraid of that you have to impose your fears on all the students in schools.