Trump just won the election

[Phoenix_person]

 

2 hours ago, Ironhold said:

but past a certain point Twitter got sorted. 

I'm not a businessman, but taking a company that he paid $44B for and turning it into a $9B company doesn't seem like getting things sorted.

[LDSGator]

5 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

 

I'm not a businessman, but taking a company that he paid $44B for and turning it into a $9B company doesn't seem like getting things sorted.

Don’t fall into what I call the “Disney trap”. Reading one or two things about the companies finances and then proclaiming the status of the company like a grizzled expert stockbroker.  The right did this with Nike. Target. Disney. Harley Davidson….

Edited November 7, 2024 by LDSGator

[Carborendum]

16 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

I'm not a businessman, but taking a company that he paid $44B for and turning it into a $9B company doesn't seem like getting things sorted.

Musk is absolutely aware that it was a money pit.  

But for him, it was more important to preserve free speech than to preserve his net worth.  I guess you could call it "conservative wokeness"???

The point is that he didn't buy it to make money.  He did it for altruistic reasons.  You could consider it his form a charity to "freedom loving people."

Edited November 7, 2024 by Carborendum

[LDSGator]

14 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

The point is that he didn't buy it to make money.  He did it for altruistic reasons.  You could consider it his form a charity to "freedom loving people."

How do you know this? Did he tell you? 
 

Twitter cost a TON of money. I highly doubt he bought it out of cuddliness and compassion for the right.

Edited November 7, 2024 by LDSGator

[Phoenix_person]

7 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Musk is absolutely aware that it was a money pit.  

But for him, it was more important to preserve free speech than to preserve his net worth.  I guess you could call it "conservative wokeness"???

The point is that he didn't buy it to make money.  He did it for altruistic reasons.  You could consider it his form a charity to "freedom loving people."

Translation: all slurs are now permitted except for a harmless adjective that is not a slur. This guy is completely unserious.

[Carborendum]

31 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

Translation: all slurs are now permitted except for a harmless adjective that is not a slur. This guy is completely unserious.

Yawn: Any other examples?

Edited November 7, 2024 by Carborendum

[Vort]

32 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

How do you know this? Did he tell you? 
 

Twitter cost a TON of money. I highly doubt he bought it out of cuddliness and compassion for the right.

It's clear Musk tried to back out of his purchase. But buying Twitter was never about making money in a financially profitable investment. While Musk did not want or intend to take a multibillion-dollar bath, his interest in Twitter was principled, not money-based. That idiot Joe Biden won the presidency in part (possibly in very large part) because Twitter and associated "social media" heavily censored the free flow of information. Musk sought to remedy that, which is why he ever got involved in Twitter in the first place.

Musk certainly got more (or more accurately, less) than he bargained for in the purchase. But that's because he allowed himself to get caught up in what he was doing and set aside his objectivity for a time. In the end, he may well end up making money (even possibly lots of it) directly because of X-used-to-be-Twitter. But I am confident that Carb is essentially correct, and that Musk's Twitter purchase was never about making money. He already had (and has) plenty of that. Musk might well have lost a night's sleep, even several nights' sleep, over X. But I bet he doesn't lose sleep over it any more. The man is worth many, many times what he paid for Twitter, and it does give him an in on social media communications.

 

[mikbone]

Free speech is back baby!

Good luck with your micro aggressions.

There were no such concepts of micro aggressions in my childhood.  People back in my youth had a tougher skin.

 

[Vort]

37 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

This guy [Musk] is completely unserious.

That's what I like to hear. The more the opposition discounts you, the better your position.

[zil2]

4 minutes ago, mikbone said:

People back in my youth had a tougher skin.

I hear lotion helps with that.

[LDSGator]

4 minutes ago, Vort said:

The man is worth many, many times what he paid for Twitter,

Right, and he got that way by not wasting money.

If you want to believe he was the noble white knight riding his horse to save the day, fine. But I’m almost certain his long term goal is to make money.

And there’s nothing wrong with that. In fact, making a profit is a good thing.  

[LDSGator]

I admire Musk. He’s a very savvy businessman.  Like all of them, he’s mainly concerned with making money. That’s a good thing, a very good thing actually. By making money you employ more people, giving them health insurance and allowing them to pursue their own interests. I’m a raw capitalist when it comes to that.

But I’m not naive. Even if he had other reasons to buy Twitter/X, he absolutely, 100% cares about profit. Or at least he should. His employees would be irritated if he suddenly stopped caring about profits.     

[Carborendum]

32 minutes ago, Vort said:

In the end, he may well end up making money (even possibly lots of it) directly because of X-used-to-be-Twitter.

It will be a LOOOONNGGGG time before he turns a profit off of the intial purchase price.  In fact, the current profits may not even pay for the interest on the loan he had to sign for the purchase.

32 minutes ago, Vort said:

But I am confident that Carb is essentially correct, and that Musk's Twitter purchase was never about making money. He already had (and has) plenty of that. Musk might well have lost a night's sleep, even several nights' sleep, over X. But I bet he doesn't lose sleep over it any more. The man is worth many, many times what he paid for Twitter, and it does give him an in on social media communications.

The primary reason he bought it was because of his "dead" son who was "killed by the trans-movement."  That's what is motivating him.  That's why he named the company "X".  That was his son's nickname before he transitioned.

And that is why he included "cis" as a slur on X.  But the fact is that people can still use "Cis" and "cisgendered" on X.  

Notice how this guy tests it and says no one banned him.

And just like any other slur, the posts are not removed.  They are behind a warning which virtually anyone can click and still have access to.

His threat wasn't just about using a word.  It was that if someone uses the word to harass someone else, then they will  be treated the same way as if someone threatens or harasses someone using any other slur. 

Edited November 7, 2024 by Carborendum

[LDSGator]

This is, of course, unsolicited business advice but you should be highly skeptical when someone says their “real motive” in opening/purchasing/creating a company is love, free speech, social justice, or anything other than making money. If you don’t put that first, regardless of how rich you are, it’ll end in disaster.
 

Of course it tugs on your heartstrings when you agree with the cause. I’d love to open a charity providing sports gear to poor people. But it would be impossible to maintain. 

Ask the leftwingers who tried to open up a talk radio network in the 2000’s to compete with Rush/Beck/Hannity.  
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_America_(radio_network)

 

The opposite is true too. If I open a pro life t shirt company and focus more on the topic rather than a profit, I’ll find myself in ruins shortly.  

Edited November 7, 2024 by LDSGator

[Phoenix_person]

 

1 hour ago, mikbone said:

There were no such concepts of micro aggressions in my childhood.  People back in my youth had a tougher skin.

People back in your youth* had microaggressions too, like black people existing in white swimming pools (or white diners, or white bathrooms, or the wrong seat on a bus). And conservatives still have them today. Dr Seuss, Mr Potato Head, Aunt Jemima, etc. 

*Based on your past posts, I'm guessing you're around my parents' age. Apologies if I'm wrong.

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

The primary reason he bought it was because of his "dead" son who was "killed by the trans-movement."  That's what is motivating him.  That's why he named the company "X".  That was his son's nickname before he transitioned.

I knew his daughter hated him for good reasons, but crikey. That's bad. 

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

And that is why he included "cis" as a slur on X.  But the fact is that people can still use "Cis" and "cisgendered" on X.  

Notice how this guy tests it and says no one banned him.

And just like any other slur, the posts are not removed.  They are behind a warning which virtually anyone can click and still have access to.

Still meaningless when so many other *actual* slurs are being used to bully and harass people with impunity. If he actually enforced his harassment policy consistently, I might respect it a bit more. As an experiment, I reported this guy. We'll see what happens, but in the past when I've reported language like this (and worse), nothing gets done. I'll report back.

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

His threat wasn't just about using a word.  It was that if someone uses the word to harass someone else, then they will  be treated the same way as if someone threatens or harasses someone using any other slur. 

Except there's been zero indication that he is actually interested in censoring anything from verified (paying) conservative accounts that go around harrassing queer, BIPOC, and Jewish users. Again, I'd respect the policy more if there was ANY consistency in its enforcement.

Edited November 7, 2024 by Phoenix_person

[LDSGator]

I can’t imagine in my wildest dreams any conservative here- @zil2, @Vort, @mirkwood, @Carborendum-being cool with that kind of language. 
 

I think conservatives get wrongly accused of being racist and liberals are wrongly accused of being unpatriotic. 

[Phoenix_person]

43 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

I can’t imagine in my wildest dreams any conservative here- @zil2, @Vort, @mirkwood, @Carborendum-being cool with that kind of language. 
 

I think conservatives get wrongly accused of being racist and liberals are wrongly accused of being unpatriotic. 

And that's just it, the "censorship" that was previously in place kept all hateful extremes in check, left and right. Elon didn't "legalize" free speech. He legalized hate speech. Sure, hate speech is Constitutionally protected, but that doesn't mean it deserves easy access from the private sector. Elon was well within his rights to make those changes, and the free market did its thing. I had planned on waiting out its collapse, but I think my days there may be numbered. People celebrating increased call volume to the Trevor Project isn't something I want to share any kind of space with.

[LDSGator]

3 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

And that's just it, the "censorship" that was previously in place kept all hateful extremes in check, left and right. Elon didn't "legalize" free speech. He legalized hate speech. Sure, hate speech is Constitutionally protected, but that doesn't mean it deserves easy access from the private sector. Elon was well within his rights to make those changes, and the free market did its thing. I had planned on waiting out its collapse, but I think my days there may be numbered. People celebrating increased call volume to the Trevor Project isn't something I want to share any kind of space with.

All legit. 

[mikbone]

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

People back in your youth* had microaggressions too, like black people existing in white swimming pools (or white diners, or white bathrooms, or the wrong seat on a bus). And conservatives still have them today. Dr Seuss, Mr Potato Head, Aunt Jemima, etc. 

Yes there were people in my youth that were racist.  I’ve never been racist.  And I’m a bit younger than you imagine.  I was in undergrad watching Seinfeld and Friends on ‘Must-see-TV’ on Thursday nights.

Seinfeld has stated that his comedy work would be banned today due to cancel culture, snowflakes, micro-aggressions etc.

I’m done with cancel culture.  

Thank you Trump, Elon Musk and the popular majority of Americans that believe in freedom.

 

[LDSGator]

29 minutes ago, mikbone said:

I’m done with cancel culture.

Agree fully on that one. 

[Phoenix_person]

22 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Seinfeld has stated that his comedy work would be banned today due to cancel culture, snowflakes, micro-aggressions etc.

Then it confirms what I've always felt about Seinfeld: that he's not a very good comedian. If his goal is to be funny, risque, and not canceled, he need look no further than guys like Larry David and Rob McElhenney. Heck, Larry's the one who made him a sitcom star. I guess he wasn't taking notes. If you can't be funny without punching down, then you're not funny.

[LDSGator]

8 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

guess he wasn't taking notes. If you can't be funny without punching down, then you're not funny.

Agree-but with a caveat. For comedy to be funny generally someone has to be in some form of misery. I totally agree it’s cruel to just point and laugh though.  

[mikbone]

Friendly reminder, we keep winning more seats.  😈

[Vort]

@mikbone, I have to hand it to you. When you started this thread right after the first assassination attempt, I thought you were jumping the gun. The superstitious side of my brain almost felt like you were jinxing things. But your prophecy came true. Congrats. As a reformed Never-Trump-er, I'm quite happy about that.

[mikbone]