Why are democrats worried about Musk buying Twitter?

[ChumpDumper]

This is how they operate. Politics is their religion and they'll take any advantage at any cost.

Also this is why you can't just send your kids to their classrooms. They bring the same energy there.

You don't have any children.

[Isitjustme?]

This is how they operate. Politics is their religion and they'll take any advantage at any cost.

Also this is why you can't just send your kids to their classrooms. They bring the same energy there.

Conservatives fill up a diaper over stupid like this then mock liberals for having a "victim complex" when they gripe about

[Isitjustme?]

[Nathan89]

[Isitjustme?]

[Ef-man]

Why don't you answer the question? Do you know what Chan had access to?

And Jim Baker was a Twitter employee at the time. What evidence do you have that A) he "inserted himself" in the process and B) he acted in bad faith?

This is more "connecting the dots"...

Nono - TSA has unexpectedly leave the US to work in Korea, in a 24/7 work area that has no internets.

He is not hiding, just not able to communicate his findings.

He will connect the dots (and other mysteries related to hillary, hunter, "the big guy," satanist cabals, children eating habits of liberal elitists, soros/gates, hidden basements, and scandalous political emails) at a later time.

Please stand by.

[TSA]

Spurminator was right to say most of this is crying over garden variety content moderation.

[Winehole23]

"Freedom of speech is not freedom of reach."

[Winehole23]

is that a potato in your jeans, or did you just yourself, TSA?

[ChumpDumper]

"conservatives" are more likely to break TOS because they want more than anything else to be seen as oppressed rebels.

They're just objectively bad at using social media the way the social media companies need them to in order to make money through advertising.

It's just another variation on "Why can't I use the N word?"

[TSA]

Why don't you answer the question? Do you know what Chan had access to?

Not sure what your question about Chan is concerning. Clarify?

And Jim Baker was a Twitter employee at the time. What evidence do you have that A) he "inserted himself" in the process and B) he acted in bad faith?

This is more "connecting the dots"...

A)

B)

[ChumpDumper]

Why would any company not want in-house counsel to vet what was being released to the press?

If Elon wants to be really transparent, release it all to ALL the press with no vetting whatsoever.

[Winehole23]

OMG, IN-HOUSE LAWYERS REVIEW STUFF BEFORE IT'S RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC

IT'S A CONSPIRACY!

[ChumpDumper]

"WHY ARE YOU VETTING THIS INFORMATION WE ARE GIVING TO THE PRESS?"

"It's my job."

"UNCONVINCING!"

[Medvedenko]

Honestly, Who gives a about any of this.

[ElNono]

Not sure what your question about Chan is concerning. Clarify?

It doesn't matter, you brought up Chen as a crutch.

Now answer the question, it's pretty simple: Do you know what Chan had access to?

A)

B)

So no evidence he "inserted himself" in the process nor that he acted in bad faith... got it

[Monostradamus]

Honestly, Who gives a about any of this.

It can be amusing to watch the train wreck, but anybody who treats twitter like it’s a fight for the future of civilization, and anything more than a B-level social media platform, is re ed tbh.

The real world does not revolve around twitter, and Elon is doing all this to increase revenue. That’s it. The rubes who think this is really about free speech are incomprehensibly stupid.

[spurraider21]

aside from the totality of Weiss' story being "twitter has been using tools in the past that Elon has promised will be the policy going forward"... still frustrating that Weiss has to lie, or at the very least, mislead

so here, she points to the fact that they said "we do not shadowban" in an attempted "gotcha"... and then in the very next tweet, she says "many people" define shadowbanning as "visibility filtering"

but when Gadde said they "do not shadowban" she made it very clear that they DO engage in visibility filtering. when Gadde said they dont shadowban, she wasnt just referring to VF. she defined shadowbanning as making it IMPOSSIBLE to find other people's content (see below). its therefore deceitful to say "Gadde said they didnt shadowban, but now we have proof that they indeed engaged in shadowbanning aka VF"

Gadde's quote with more context:

But has Twitter responded to the claims with a blog post authored by project leads Kayvon Beykpour and Vijaya Gadde that defined shadow banning as "deliberately making someone's content undiscoverable to everyone except the person who posted it, unbeknownst to the original poster".

"We do not shadow ban," they wrote. "You are always able to see the tweets from accounts you follow (although you may have to do more work to find them, like go directly to their profile).

https://www.itpro.com/social-media/3...not-shadow-ban


these bombs revelations that they made it harder to find people's content is exactly in line what what twitter execs had already said years ago. i cited a 2018 article where they already talk about this. now its just a semantic game about "we are going to refer to VF as shadowbanning, and twitter execs had previously said they do not shadowban (even though they used a different definition of shadowban so they were not referring to the same thing)"

[Nathan89]

Democrats win by keeping you uninformed. That's why their members censor. That's why they are terrified of Elon breaking their total control of big tech.

This is also why they want to shove a ballot up your ass. That's the easiest way to get the most uninformed voters.

[spurraider21]

Democrats win by keeping you uninformed. That's why their members censor. That's why they are terrified of Elon breaking their total control of big tech.

This is also why they want to shove a ballot up your ass. That's the easiest way to get the most uninformed voters.

the internal communications acknowledged that she had not directly violated the TOS which is why she was ineligible for a permanent suspension. just because that account did not harass, it regularly incited harassment of others, which they considered to be an "indirect" violation of the anti-harassment TOS.

[Isitjustme?]

Honestly, Who gives a about any of this.

The Trump style candidates who win TSA and Nathan's hearts and also 2 out of 16 races now (per this years midterms)

[ChumpDumper]

Democrats win by keeping you uninformed. That's why their members censor. That's why they are terrified of Elon breaking their total control of big tech.

This is also why they want to shove a ballot up your ass. That's the easiest way to get the most uninformed voters.

Why don't you just start killing people?

[Winehole23]

Why don't you just start killing people?

kicking everyone who disagrees with the right wing into the same ditch and calling them all perverters of youth, creates a pretext for political violence.

[boutons_deux]

Musk fraudulently trying to draw advertising traffic by hyping bull

Musk and MAGA won’t shut up about the ‘Twitter Files’ now,

but GOP officials dismissed them in 2021


https://www.dailykos.com/stories/202...d-them-in-2021

As for all Capitalists, people are cheap, expendable, so Musk fired the lawyer who kept this BULL off Internet.

[Leetonidas]