Jump to content

Elon’s Twitter Investment


Elon’s Twitter Investment   

8 members have voted

  1. 1. Will Elon’s 44 Billion Dollar Twitter Investment Turn out to be

    • A wise, profitable endeavor
      1
    • A bust or essentially flat
      7


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, AUDub said:

OK, so how do constitutional protections of free speech applies to businesses like Twitter? 

This should be hilarious if he actually responds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





I must be the only person on Earth never to visit twitter, facebook or myspace😆

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kevon67 said:

I must be the only person on Earth never to visit twitter, facebook or myspace😆

 

Well myspace is dead and has been for a minute but surprisingly there are many young people who do not really care for social media.  Myself included. 

the old quote was "religion is the opiate of the masses" but today I think it has changed to "social media is the opiate of the masses."

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AUDub said:

Watch how quickly it becomes untenable should Musk's plan be put in place. It will melt.

His plan is that all legal speech should be allowed. I got bad news for you, people suck, and legal is not a synonym with appropriate. 

Let's use an example here. Say I called one of our black posters something highly inappropriate,  suggest hanging every jew on earth or say homosexuals should be taken out back and shot. Titan or Tex would boot my ass out the door before I could blink because that's literally their jobs as moderators of the forum. 

But that speech is legal, and would be allowed in Musk's version of Twitter. 

Users aren't going to hang around a cesspit.

Tricky thing about “legal” is that Twitter is a global platform. Legal where?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AUDub said:

They violated the terms of service and have to face the consequences of their action.  They knew the rule (as they've violated it before).

Plus it was suspension, not a ban. 

This is how the old twitter protected the left’s agenda.  Now it should not be protected.  That’s the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, kevon67 said:

I must be the only person on Earth never to visit twitter, facebook or myspace😆

 

Nope.  :wavey:

There's at least two of us. ;)

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

This is how the old twitter protected the left’s agenda.  Now it should not be protected.  That’s the point.

Interesting that you consider civility and respect the "lefts agenda". 

I don't disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

Interesting that you consider civility and respect the "lefts agenda". 

I don't disagree.

You obviously misinterpreted my post.  The Babylon Bee was suspended for saying a trans man won the man of the year award.  That is one of the left’s agendas.  That is the type of agenda that has been protected by twitter’s policies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, I_M4_AU said:

You obviously misinterpreted my post.  The Babylon Bee was suspended for saying a trans man won the man of the year award.  That is one of the left’s agendas.  That is the type of agenda that has been protected by twitter’s policies.

Squirrel!   :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Squirrel!   :laugh:

You come into a conversation and don’t know what you are talking about, and I’m the squirrel?  You are out of your mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

You come into a conversation and don’t know what you are talking about, and I’m the squirrel?  You are out of your mind.

Transexual Squirrel !?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Transexual Squirrel !?

Its good that you are coming out of the closet.  Good for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Its good that you are coming out of the closet.  Good for you.

Man, your reservoir of wit is just bottomless.  :laugh:

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twesla.......

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Didba said:

This should be hilarious if he actually responds.

Isn't Pensacola the one who was citing a court ruling to prove scientists got the science wrong?

Yeah, this should be good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Isn't Pensacola the one who was citing a court ruling to prove scientists got the science wrong?

Yeah, this should be good.

Yes, lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Didba said:

Please cite a SCOTUS case where they applied the free speech clause to private corporations please.

If you understand public forum doctrine you understand that recent judgments in favor of social media suppression are due only to our legal system lagging too far behind technology. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

Tricky thing about “legal” is that Twitter is a global platform. Legal where?

Absolutists don't put that much thought into it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Isn't Pensacola the one who was citing a court ruling to prove scientists got the science wrong?

Yeah, this should be good.

Lol - NY ruled it unconstitutional to require a shot that doesn’t prevent transmission.  How many of your communist overlords touted “it’s selfish to not get the shot, think of others” and when that was disproved, quickly pivoted to “but muh viral loads”?

I’m sorry some of you weren’t smart enough to even see that progression 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, pensacolatiger said:

If you understand public forum doctrine you understand that recent judgments in favor of social media suppression are due only to our legal system lagging too far behind technology. 

So no cite then?

Also, the public forum doctrine applying to private online forums is the biggest crock of crap I have ever heard spewed by right wing legal "experts".

The only time the public forum doctrine applies to private internet forums is for the public accounts of government officials/politicians and all it states is that they cannot block citizens of the US based on their viewpoints

Edited by Didba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, pensacolatiger said:

If you understand public forum doctrine you understand that recent judgments in favor of social media suppression are due only to our legal system lagging too far behind technology. 

Perhaps - just maybe  - the actual wording of the first amendment is what's holding our legal system up?

(You're right Didba, this is pretty good.)

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Didba said:

So no cite then?

Also, the public forum doctrine applying to private online forums is the biggest crock of crap I have ever heard spewed.

Sorry you don’t understand the intent of public forum doctrine?  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, pensacolatiger said:

Lol - NY ruled it unconstitutional to require a shot that doesn’t prevent transmission.  How many of your communist overlords touted “it’s selfish to not get the shot, think of others” and when that was disproved, quickly pivoted to “but muh viral loads”?

I’m sorry some of you weren’t smart enough to even see that progression 

LMAO, this is so ironic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, pensacolatiger said:

Sorry you don’t understand the intent of public forum doctrine?  

Could you provide that cite please? 

While you are at it since I apparently don't understand the intent of public forum doctrine, would you please explain your understanding of its intent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, pensacolatiger said:

Sorry you don’t understand the intent of public forum doctrine?  

I think you're revealing your inner statist.

You want a public forum, petition your government to operate one. Forcing a private company to host content they don't want violating their free speech. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...