Starting to wonder if the non-profit corporate form is actually worth allowing at all. There's just so much manipulative or flat out crazy behavior coming from

Starting to wonder if the non-profit corporate form is actually worth allowing at all. There's just so much manipulative or flat out crazy behavior coming from that sector in recent years, of the stuff that'd be slapped down by the courts or governments very fast if it were done by for-profit entities where people's guard is up. OpenAI, Wikimedia manipulating people into donating, the famously expensive WWF fundraising balls and now this. Media Matters will hopefully lose their lawsuit, be liable for X's losses and be destroyed. They've clearly been passing off heavily manipulated scenarios to advertisers as if they were representative of the average user's experience, for the sole and explicit purpose of waging left wing ideological war against the only tech company willing to defy them, which is a behavior harmful for society overall especially as it's an attack on a more or less public square. You don't see commercial competitors engaging in such manipulative and aggressive attacks like that much, if at all, probably because they are run by rationally self-interested people who don't want to wreck their organization by starting legal fights over ideology. Unfortunately even if X does win presumably Media Matters has little money to make amends, and there are hundreds of similar leftist NGOs dotted across the landscape using aggressive manipulation to police what people are allowed to say, many of which are just very thin proxies for the US government (see the Twitter Files for examples of that). This problem isn't specific to X, pretty much any organization that isn't explicitly leftist will find that its advertisers are all being constantly harassed and libelled by NGO activists. The UK's attempt at a conservative TV news channel constantly faces this problem as well, as do any conservative news websites or blogs. A real fix for this type of behavior will probably require law changes to strip the corporate veil from non-profit board members, such that they become personally liable for legal costs of the non-profit itself. Limited liability is useful to grant to for-profit companies because they often take actual and serious risks with large amounts of capital, so there needs to be some shield against that risk becoming of uncontrollable size. But the NGO sector doesn't risk capital to build anything productive. One of the very few that did was OpenAI and we're seeing how that plays out right now.