6 ms·

This is the crux of the matter right here. I hate that people are doing all these weird gymnastics to reconcile being a champion of free speech and firing peop

by cptaj 4y ago

This is the crux of the matter right here. I hate that people are doing all these weird gymnastics to reconcile being a champion of free speech and firing people that criticize you. Yeah, guys, it might be legal (maybe not) but it IS hypocritical. If you want to champion free speech you can't do this shit. Stop with the debate team bullshit and exercise some common sense.

donatj 4y ago
Hard Disagree. Just freedom in all directions. You're free to say what you want, they're free to fire you for it. That's completely consistent.
- monktastic1 4y ago
  That's not a disagreement. Parent comment is asking for consistency. "If you believe... then..."
- svachalek 4y ago
  That's not what freedom of speech is about. You're free to say what you want in any country in the world, once. The first amendment is about protecting you from some of the consequences of that. Not specifically firing, but that's not his issue with Twitter either.
  - rvz 4y ago
    If this was a government censoring, banning journalists, stories and the media or even blocking the whole internet and punishing companies that criticize them or to stop the letter being published, that totally violates free speech. Generally, It doesn’t apply to ‘privately owned companies’ Just like how these employees are free to criticize their employer it does not mean there are freedom of consequences and employers are just as free to fire their employees. That is why they stay anonymous and criticize their employer just like what happened with Coinbase.
  - oarabbus_ 4y ago
    > The first amendment is about protecting you from some of the consequences of that. Not specifically firing Free speech protects individuals from government prosecution only. It has nothing to do with employment or labor law.
- wesleywt 4y ago
  But Elon in particular should not be firing anyone if HE believes in free-speech. It is hypocritical.
mlindner 4y ago
You can be a champion of free speech in public in the sense that you do not have your freedom of speech taken away from you. However SpaceX is not a public forum for your speech. You can't abuse internal email lists to have your speech reach more people than it would normally.
- jonathankoren 4y ago
  I can't believe I have to say this, but the hypocrisy comes from the fact that Elon, and many others, believe (or in Elon's case, purports to believe) that private entities should not moderate their own products, and instead guarantee an audience for people[0]. They don't. That's not what censorship is. [0] Now Elon has recently said in that video call to Twitter employees that free speech doesn't mean a right to an audience, but it's hard to square that statement with his previous statements.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    > I can't believe I have to say this, but the hypocrisy comes from the fact that Elon, and many others, believe (or in Elon's case, purports to believe) that private entities should not moderate their own products, and instead guarantee an audience for people[0]. They don't. That's not what censorship is. This is incoherent. Musk can express that he wants Twitter to moderate according to free speech principles--that's not the same thing as asserting that Twitter has a legal responsibility to moderate according to free speech principles. Moreover, censorship doesn't require the censor to be the State--a private platform can censor content, and they often do. Per the ACLU: > Censorship, the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are "offensive," happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on others. Censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups. Per Wikipedia: > Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. This may be done on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient".[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by governments,[5] private institutions and other controlling bodies.
  - evandale 4y ago
justbored123 4y ago
Tehchops 4y ago
> I hate that people are doing all these weird gymnastics to reconcile being a champion of free speech and firing people that criticize you. You're just seeing the psychic ripples of all the Elon fanboys and pseudo-libertarian technofascists wrestling with the cognitive dissonance of their savior turning out to be a pretty vanilla corporate capitalist. After all the chest-thumping and general toxicity I find their discomfort endlessly amusing.
- moron123 4y ago
  As an Elon fanboy, nothing he did surprised me in the least. He may be one of the most consistent public figures out there.
- biohacker85 4y ago
  > I find their discomfort endlessly amusing No doubt it is amusing, but it doesn't compare to the detractors having a meltdown after his every move.
cactus2093 4y ago
Some call it "debate team bullshit", others would call it "applying basic logic". Why let a pesky little thing like intellectual honesty stand in the way of jumping on a good hate bandwagon?

by cptaj 4y ago

donatj 4y ago

Hard Disagree. Just freedom in all directions. You're free to say what you want, they're free to fire you for it. That's completely consistent.

monktastic1 4y ago
That's not a disagreement. Parent comment is asking for consistency. "If you believe... then..."
svachalek 4y ago
That's not what freedom of speech is about. You're free to say what you want in any country in the world, once. The first amendment is about protecting you from some of the consequences of that. Not specifically firing, but that's not his issue with Twitter either.
- rvz 4y ago
  If this was a government censoring, banning journalists, stories and the media or even blocking the whole internet and punishing companies that criticize them or to stop the letter being published, that totally violates free speech. Generally, It doesn’t apply to ‘privately owned companies’ Just like how these employees are free to criticize their employer it does not mean there are freedom of consequences and employers are just as free to fire their employees. That is why they stay anonymous and criticize their employer just like what happened with Coinbase.
- oarabbus_ 4y ago
  > The first amendment is about protecting you from some of the consequences of that. Not specifically firing Free speech protects individuals from government prosecution only. It has nothing to do with employment or labor law.
wesleywt 4y ago
But Elon in particular should not be firing anyone if HE believes in free-speech. It is hypocritical.

mlindner 4y ago

You can be a champion of free speech in public in the sense that you do not have your freedom of speech taken away from you. However SpaceX is not a public forum for your speech. You can't abuse internal email lists to have your speech reach more people than it would normally.

jonathankoren 4y ago
I can't believe I have to say this, but the hypocrisy comes from the fact that Elon, and many others, believe (or in Elon's case, purports to believe) that private entities should not moderate their own products, and instead guarantee an audience for people[0]. They don't. That's not what censorship is. [0] Now Elon has recently said in that video call to Twitter employees that free speech doesn't mean a right to an audience, but it's hard to square that statement with his previous statements.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  > I can't believe I have to say this, but the hypocrisy comes from the fact that Elon, and many others, believe (or in Elon's case, purports to believe) that private entities should not moderate their own products, and instead guarantee an audience for people[0]. They don't. That's not what censorship is. This is incoherent. Musk can express that he wants Twitter to moderate according to free speech principles--that's not the same thing as asserting that Twitter has a legal responsibility to moderate according to free speech principles. Moreover, censorship doesn't require the censor to be the State--a private platform can censor content, and they often do. Per the ACLU: > Censorship, the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are "offensive," happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on others. Censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups. Per Wikipedia: > Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. This may be done on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient".[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by governments,[5] private institutions and other controlling bodies.
- evandale 4y ago

justbored123 4y ago

Tehchops 4y ago

> I hate that people are doing all these weird gymnastics to reconcile being a champion of free speech and firing people that criticize you. You're just seeing the psychic ripples of all the Elon fanboys and pseudo-libertarian technofascists wrestling with the cognitive dissonance of their savior turning out to be a pretty vanilla corporate capitalist. After all the chest-thumping and general toxicity I find their discomfort endlessly amusing.

moron123 4y ago
As an Elon fanboy, nothing he did surprised me in the least. He may be one of the most consistent public figures out there.
biohacker85 4y ago
> I find their discomfort endlessly amusing No doubt it is amusing, but it doesn't compare to the detractors having a meltdown after his every move.

cactus2093 4y ago

Some call it "debate team bullshit", others would call it "applying basic logic". Why let a pesky little thing like intellectual honesty stand in the way of jumping on a good hate bandwagon?