Elon Musk is in “Bonkersland”?

No, I don't see people saying "twitter can't do what they want." I see people upset at the suspensions of people over being critical of Musk, but I don't see anyone saying Musk can't do it or is violating anyone's rights.

 

Taking you on a rhetorical ‘ride’ or something, huh? Puh-lease.

Also, it’s almost like the motivations behind the “violates my free speech” bit that has you spewing totally escaped you. It’s ok to be amused by “the left” suddenly adopting the same recycled talking points “the right” has espoused these past few years as if Twitter and the 1st amendment has anything to do with the other. The idea that “the right” (and no, I’m not talking about neo-Nazis or whatever negative stereotype/ideals your head caricatures all conservatives as being representative of) hasn’t been attempting to bring big tech censorship to the attention of the masses would be nothing but revisionist history.

 

Are suspensions really due to criticizing as you say? Thought they were temporary and based on doxxing live location of Musk, which is a safety issue for a hated billionairre.

 

When did those reporters dox his live location? They didn't. If they're temporary, we will know in a week but apparently the reporters were told it is permanent.

 

don’t know. It’s still amusing and ironic for cnn, wash post and others complaining about Musk not allowing free speech. That’s kinda the whole point. Twitter banned the POTUS and the left loved it. Now they are whining about free speech.

 

The claim I am challenging is that "the left" has adopted the same recycled talking points "the right" has been using. That is not being substantiated, just repeated. I need evidence, not repetition of the claim.

I called you a conservative caricature. So do you believe I think you are a nazi, or is this another rhetorical turd to smear me by insinuating I think everyone on the right are neo-Nazis when you don't really think that? Or is it just like reflexive muscle memory to to say these things at this point, like a drone?

I first experienced big tech censorship in an AOL college football chatroom in December 1998, as I spammed Vols smack talk and was timed out. It is their sandbox. If someone here were doxxing people, we would have to ban them too. It has come up. I don't see that as unreasonable censorship. Neither do I think it is unreasonable to ban people who are seeking harm Fauci or his family, Musk or his family, or otherwise do violent things. It gets grey with misinformation about public health threats. That guys like Ben Shapiro remain without issue shows it isn't just a matter of being conservative. He's actually pretty conservative.

 

One silver lining: Keith Olberman getting a timeout from Twitter is probably not the worst thing in the world for that poor old man’s mental sanity. Talk about a guy who just seems like he’s not having a good time anymore

 

Could you quote the places in the article where you perceive "CNN" to be complaining about Musk not allowing free speech, rather than reporting on what happened and how it conflicts with Musk's previous statements?

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/15/media/twitter-musk-journalists-hnk-intl/index.html

 

The "doxxing" was people tweeting links to the Elon jet tracker account now on mastadon. Others was just people critical of Musk. Elon claimed the account lead to a person attacking the car his son was in. Despite that alleged event occurring two days after the most recent Elon jet tweet. So he suspended the jet account and the personal account of the guy who created it, despite repeatedly stating he would not do so after buying the platform. Also of note, the LA PD has said that no report has been filed by Musk or his team regarding the incident so we don't even know if it happened at all or is a poor attempt at cover.

Elon is free to say he's free speech absolutist and happy to hand a megaphone to promoters of racism and violence while mass suspending every one critical against him. It's his right and it's his platform, but we all see what's happening. We're not raging or unhinged, just stating the obvious.

 

I remember Elon going on shows and talks patting himself on the back after the initial Twitter offer saying it wasn't about making money, he (being the benevolent billionaire) would lose money to keep the platform free and open, because Twitter moderation was putting the nation on a precipice and he felt the need to save humanity. That aged about as well as anyone expected.

 

The Rupar tweet of him mocking old school conservative talking points on Twitter censorship doesn’t count as “evidence”, huh? All I did was regurgitate the same BS BlueAnon yokels like Rupar dished out for years onto conservatives when they mocked conservative displeasure on how Twitter enforced and governed “free speech” on their platform. Even you have talked on here about noticing how the old guard at Twitter would always ban “problematic” right wing accounts more frequently and hastier when compared to the leftist Sab-like fringes.

And who am I to say what you actually think about conservatives? I can only guess. After all “conservatives only want to shout down others” or whatever “caricature” you use to there to describe conservatives. Forgive me for not giving you the benefit of the doubt. Crazy to assume you don’t exactly have anything nice to say here about those who have differing partisan viewpoints from yourself when you are coming out hot with generalizations like that.

 

Why are certain Senators suddenly interested in how Twitter operates? Are we to believe she, a current representative of the United States government, isn’t coming from a “Musk is a danger/threat to free speech” angle here? Or is she only saying Musk should not be allowed to make up and enforce the rules within a private company he paid 44 billion for?

 

If all this nonsense has done anything for me it has just reinforced how important all these “journalists” insanely think they are

 

Enforce rules or simply arbitrarily apply them?

Honestly, I don't give much of a shit. I am on Twitter for information about news and sports with some random conversations, most of which go nowhere. The few obvious changes I've seen in Twitter since Musk has taken over recently are, one, the ubiquitousness of Musk himself. He's at the top of my feed almost every day and I very rarely click on his posts. So, it's become a showcase for a guy needing a significant amount of attention. Second, is he takes himself very seriously and will act with exceptional speed on items which relate to him. The third thing which is pretty clear is the expansion of distinctly racist, homophobic, and sexist posters who, I think, perceive themselves to be in a friendlier environment or the cuts at Twitter have eliminated many of the gatekeepers on this front.

Otherwise, it's still a relatively good place to go for quick and up to the minute information and I'm not leaving in protest, especially since it's tree falling in the forest stuff. However, Musk seems like too much of a chaos and needy kind of figure, the type of person who's been the boss his entire life and expects deference and praise at all times, while lashing out petulantly at critiques.

So, did those reporters deserve banning? To me, it appears pretty capricious and Musk desiring to make some kind of splash. If he wants to create a more mainstream Truth Social it's his prerogative, but it appears he's going down an unnecessarily messy road. I don't see how this is sustainable.

 

She has been consistent about not wanting single censors of social media content:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/11/elizabeth-warren-facebook-ads-break-up-big-tech

 

Especially when you consider how many of them-regardless of political persuasion-brand themselves as some type of activist “making the world a better place” while simultaneously serving as a mouthpiece for whatever giant media corporation it is that employs them.

 

What you posted in no way supports a claim that anyone, including Rupar, is now saying Twitter doesn't have the right to ban whoever, whenever. It is a picture of him saying that, and then a picture of him being banned. Do you see the difference?

 

As if it is her business as a representative of the US government to dictate how an entity like Twitter enforces their rules anyway. Or is it the point? That it is indeed her business?

 

Again, you are fixating on two sentences written in what I thought was conveyed as obvious sarcasm highlighting the irony of the sudden attitude change some are expressing with how Twitter operates. I was mockingly regurgitating typical attitudes and answers many on “the left” happily dished out to cons [itch bay]ing about big tech censorship over these past few years. Now, a totally different tune is being sung. It is correct to point out how essentially many “on the left” are suddenly more enthusiastic about censorship issues surrounding these big tech platforms that have largely monopolized how information is distributed and consumed. It’s not a gotcha. Nor is it a belittling or insulting point to make. It’s just an observation for anyone who has been paying attention to rhetoric surrounding the issues of big tech censorship these last few years.

But of course you don’t see the point behind including that Rupar tweet in the specific context of that singular post. You honestly fail to see all the logically flawed “woe is our free speech” rhetoric erupting over the suspension of folks like Rupar and Olberman? As if “free speech” and Twitter has ever been synonymous to begin with?

 

It seems like he might have shut down the Twitter Spaces feature after getting absolutely roasted while taking part in one last night.

It could also be an update to my app and the Spaces feature has been moved and I can’t find it, but given what we know about our billionaire baby [itch bay], that seems unlikely.