The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down

Status
Not open for further replies.
visibleman said:
Good article. Am curious about the "...Twitter refused to do so until nine days later when a Department of Homeland Security agent contacted Twitter and urged action." and why Twitter didn't take action within that time period. Even if Twitter come out with staffing issues, which is sort of understandable as you can imagine it's not exactly one of the jobs people are rushing to do, it doesn't look great either way.
Interesting to see what happens with the court case given it's Musk's problem now though.
Click to expand...
It's pretty shocking on twitters part, but ruling out any nefarious reasons you would have to go with that, like the vast majority of twitter employees given the evidence of twitter seemingly carrrying on as normal after the mass layoffs, the people hired were either exceptionally bad at their job or they did the grand sum of nothing.
 
Tony Edwards said:
Im not sure but is Roar the one that was defending Trumps lawyers at one stage in this thread?
Click to expand...

Which one?

The one that most recently said that gay people will suffer eternal damnation, and dying in the latest gay club shooting was them reaping the consequences of being gay?

or was it the one that got convicted of a multitude of things after getting tied up in paying off the pornstar he slept with whilst married?
 
Last edited:
Tony Edwards said:
Im not sure but is Roar the one that was defending Trumps lawyers at one stage in this thread?
Click to expand...
Good point, regardless of whether it was roar or not, to argue expensive advice means no wrong is daft. You only have to look at which idiot just bought Twitter for 44 billion, the same one that went to court to fight buying it. I'm sure the advice he got was perfect.

So today we have found out from roar:

1. People that aren't following Elon on twitter should just unfollow Elon on twitter so that they stop saying nasty things about Elon in this thread.

2. Lawyers for Elon make more money than everyone here combined (I'm doubtful on that but to ask for proof will be wasted time)

3. Top tear legal advice means you'll never be doing anything wrong.

What else have I missed?
 
Zuma said:
The legal advice he deserves
Click to expand...

The same lawyers who I would imagine told him he should definitely be doing due diligence on his purchase BEFORE making a stupidly overpriced offer, as to do otherwise would probably leave them open to losing their license to practise. Obviously, Elon knew better and so told them to do one.
 
Jono8 said:
Which one?

The one that most recently said that gay people will suffer eternal damnation, and dying in the latest gay club shooting was them reaping the consequences of being gay?

or was it the one that got convicted of a multitude of things after getting tied up in paying off the pornstar he slept with whilst married?
Click to expand...

Funnily enough it was Giuliani about the Hunter Biden laptop story brought in by a top lawyer and lawyers dont lie.

ApDwCti.jpg

uHi5zjN.jpg
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
Was Jack Dorsey telling people to vote Democratic? Was Zuckerberg?

I would imagine owners of Parlor and GAB might have been telling posters there to vote Republican but I don't bother visiting those social media sites.I think we can guess who the owner of Truth Social tells people to vote for.
Click to expand...
Dorsey spoke publically of how the circles he was in was very left leaning, and he was trying to counter balance it. But failed.

That's why Dorsey supported Musk buying Twitter.
 
C Kent said:
It's pretty shocking on twitters part, but ruling out any nefarious reasons you would have to go with that, like the vast majority of twitter employees given the evidence of twitter seemingly carrrying on as normal after the mass layoffs, the people hired were either exceptionally bad at their job or they did the grand sum of nothing.
Click to expand...
...or possibly, there's not enough staff to complete workloads in a timely manner - which is a similar situation with our forensics departments over here.

C Kent said:
I totally agree, but in this case they 'reviewed' the video of the 13 year old and decided it didn't violate their T&C's..it was only taken down after Homeland Security got involved and ordered them to do so..
Click to expand...
Did Twitter respond and say these videos didn't violate their T&C's? As that sort of material is clearly listed as a violation if you read them, so it would seem odd for them to respond with that.
 
Last edited:
Roar87 said:
Who gives a single **** is the answer Tony because that is of no relevance to this thread at all
Click to expand...
It's post like this why I said this guy is thinking he's some big tiger roaring, but in reality it just comes across as a little kitten doing a cute meow. Such tough act over what? Bringing up something that he's surely still supportive of?

It has relevance of course because when the same users defends trumps legal team, and then defends Elons legal team, knowing that users history gives weight to what they are saying now.

It's like when Sankari predicts what is going to happen at an election. His history shows why we can dismiss it and go with the opposite and laugh about it together.

"why does it give a **** Tony" just appears as unhinged and not coping with that being brought up.
 
Tony Edwards said:
Im not sure but is Roar the one that was defending Trumps lawyers at one stage in this thread?
Click to expand...

No it was @Demon

Demon said:
Of course the evidence was there, Trumps lawyer had it, he dumped it on the NYP..

So whilst misinformation could be objectively discovered, it wasn't was it.. instead a load of subjectivity got in the way and we ended up with actual misinformation of saying it was those pesky Russians.. those are the facts.. how we feel about the people invovled doesn't magically make it objective, it just makes it more subjective.

I mean, the literal facts prove that whatever objective mechanism you think Twitter use that is flawless, failed.. they ended up spreading misinformation themselves, the laptop was real and it wasn't Russian misinformation..
Click to expand...
Demon said:
Again, before carrying on:
Objective: "(of a person or their judgement) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts."

Lets say its the sleaziest of sleazy saul goodmans.. to dsmiss the facts because you think he's a slimeball does not make it objective.

But it was Rudy Guiliani.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
visibleman said:
...or possibly, there's not enough staff to complete workloads in a timely manner - which is a similar situation with our forensics departments over here.


Did Twitter respond and say these videos didn't violate their T&C's? As that sort of material is clearly listed as a violation if you read them, so it would seem odd for them to respond with that.
Click to expand...
it's in the ruling itself, page 43/44 "twitter allegedly sent John Doe#1 a response stating, 'We've reviewed the content, and didn't find a violation of our policies, so no action will be taken at this time'". The ruling then states that one of the users sharing the video in question had a complaint raised against them a few months earlier stating 'obvious CP' to which twitter had done nothing.

Make of that what you will.

The big takeaway for me is that it looks as if not much was being done under the previous management, Must takes over and there's verifiable evidence that things are being done to tackle the issue and folks still try to use that as a stick to beat him with. Bizarre behaviour.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom