4 ms·

> I understand this move, but need to point out how hypocritical this is for Mr. Free Speech. Where's the hypocrisy? Musk said he wanted to broaden the speech

> I understand this move, but need to point out how hypocritical this is for Mr. Free Speech. Where's the hypocrisy? Musk said he wanted to broaden the speech allowed on the platform, not allow speech of all kinds. > "let's selectively release internal comms in a misleading way to make normal company operation in good faith seem like a liberal conspiracy." Maybe try getting your info from a non-leftwing source. There has been plenty of damning info coming from these internal comms.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
BlargMcLarg 4y ago
Musk has stated several times he wants "free speech" and when pushed further, mostly talks about "speech that is not at odds with the law". So yes, that is pretty inconsistent with banning an account which did nothing illegal. Assuming it was Musk who issued it. >from a non-leftwing source Can you people stop going "left wing right wing" for one day and see things for what they are instead of this infantile black-white spiel?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- PathOfEclipse 4y ago
  Who is "you people"? And how is it not relevant when it is the verbatim-repeated left-wing talking point to say that the Twitter files are a "nothing burger"?
  - rnk 4y ago
    You know you are losing an argument when you call the literal facts (tweets) saying you wouldn't do something that you did a nothing burger. Musk can do whatever he wants, and we can all make fun of him for being so obviously self serving and foolish.
    - PathOfEclipse 4y ago
      I don't lose arguments very often, and I'm certainly not losing this one. Circumstances change, and the accounts were suspended for violating a different rule. You can post what you want, and we can all make fun of you for being wrong.
three_seagrass 4y ago
> Where's the hypocrisy? https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456 > "My commitment to free speech extends even to not banning the account following my plane, even though that is a direct personal safety risk"
- nitwit005 4y ago
  That tweet is now pure comedy with the account showing as banned right underneath.
lxgr 4y ago
Elon himself, on https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519036983137509376 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519036983137509376: > By “free speech”, I simply mean that which matches the law. Was the account violating any law?
- PathOfEclipse 4y ago
  Your very own tweet disproves what you're saying: "I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law." Even back in April he was not saying he was only going to censor illegal speech. Anyways, since Elon acquired twitter he's made it a major talking point to say that twitter is still moderating by the same rules as before: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1588538640401018880 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1588538640401018880 "Twitter has had a massive drop in revenue, due to activist groups pressuring advertisers, even though nothing has changed with content moderation and we did everything we could to appease the activists." The ElonJet account was violating rules for leaking internal company communications. Is that type of censorship going "far beyond the law?" I don't think so. Internal leaks can damage a company and the company should therefore protect itself. If anything, Twitter could be legally liable to shareholders for failing to do so. On the other hand, blacklisting Dr. Jay Bhattacharya for saying things about Covid that turned out to be far more correct than what the CDC was saying at the same time is indeed going far beyond the law and also harming all of society: https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-files-confirm-stanford-professor-dr-jay-bhattacharya-blacklisted-covid-19-information https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-files-confirm-stanford...
  - BryantD 4y ago
    The owner of the ElonJet account published those leaked communications, and that account hasn’t been suspended, so there’s some inconsistency there. Zoe Schiffer, who has published many Twitter leaks this month, has not been suspended. It would be useful if Musk adopted transparency and shared the rationale behind this banning, along with all internal communications regarding it.
    - BryantD 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

BlargMcLarg 4y ago

Musk has stated several times he wants "free speech" and when pushed further, mostly talks about "speech that is not at odds with the law". So yes, that is pretty inconsistent with banning an account which did nothing illegal. Assuming it was Musk who issued it. >from a non-leftwing source Can you people stop going "left wing right wing" for one day and see things for what they are instead of this infantile black-white spiel?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
PathOfEclipse 4y ago
Who is "you people"? And how is it not relevant when it is the verbatim-repeated left-wing talking point to say that the Twitter files are a "nothing burger"?
- rnk 4y ago
  You know you are losing an argument when you call the literal facts (tweets) saying you wouldn't do something that you did a nothing burger. Musk can do whatever he wants, and we can all make fun of him for being so obviously self serving and foolish.
  - PathOfEclipse 4y ago
    I don't lose arguments very often, and I'm certainly not losing this one. Circumstances change, and the accounts were suspended for violating a different rule. You can post what you want, and we can all make fun of you for being wrong.

three_seagrass 4y ago

> Where's the hypocrisy? https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456 > "My commitment to free speech extends even to not banning the account following my plane, even though that is a direct personal safety risk"

nitwit005 4y ago
That tweet is now pure comedy with the account showing as banned right underneath.

lxgr 4y ago

Elon himself, on https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519036983137509376 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519036983137509376: > By “free speech”, I simply mean that which matches the law. Was the account violating any law?

PathOfEclipse 4y ago
Your very own tweet disproves what you're saying: "I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law." Even back in April he was not saying he was only going to censor illegal speech. Anyways, since Elon acquired twitter he's made it a major talking point to say that twitter is still moderating by the same rules as before: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1588538640401018880 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1588538640401018880 "Twitter has had a massive drop in revenue, due to activist groups pressuring advertisers, even though nothing has changed with content moderation and we did everything we could to appease the activists." The ElonJet account was violating rules for leaking internal company communications. Is that type of censorship going "far beyond the law?" I don't think so. Internal leaks can damage a company and the company should therefore protect itself. If anything, Twitter could be legally liable to shareholders for failing to do so. On the other hand, blacklisting Dr. Jay Bhattacharya for saying things about Covid that turned out to be far more correct than what the CDC was saying at the same time is indeed going far beyond the law and also harming all of society: https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-files-confirm-stanford-professor-dr-jay-bhattacharya-blacklisted-covid-19-information https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-files-confirm-stanford...
- BryantD 4y ago
  The owner of the ElonJet account published those leaked communications, and that account hasn’t been suspended, so there’s some inconsistency there. Zoe Schiffer, who has published many Twitter leaks this month, has not been suspended. It would be useful if Musk adopted transparency and shared the rationale behind this banning, along with all internal communications regarding it.
  - BryantD 4y ago