Ok, so we can see that sometimes its easier to take the money, and sometimes it can be easier to just pay the money. We don't actually know what happened though, and paying money doesn't mean you're guilty, just as taking money doesn't mean you weren't telling the truth. People on here apparently just don't have the intelligence to understand that or lack any objectivity because billionare man = bad
The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
- Status
Ok, so we can see that sometimes its easier to take the money, and sometimes it can be easier to just pay the money. We don't actually know what happened though, and paying money doesn't mean you're guilty, just as taking money doesn't mean you weren't telling the truth. People on here apparently just don't have the intelligence to understand that or lack any objectivity because billionare man = bad
Every single one of your believed facts there there is your assumption that has as much evidence as the sexual misconduct claim. And you're oblivious to it while claiming assumptions are being made.
What exactly are you disputing here? Do you think that the assumption that the employee exists and was paid a settlement is as big an assumption here as believing her story is true? That seems highly dubious, it's not even in dispute AFAIK.
Can you not just get the point? Just clarify whatever it is you're banging on about as you're still being vague - like what specifically are you referring to here?
At the speed of a glacier you're realising you're making assumptions while accusing of assumptions. What exactly is in dispute dowie? Did Elon Musk specify anything whatsoever? Something must give you the confidence for your assumptions which are still assumptions.
Worlds richest man *"likely"* has lawyers on retainer, you seem like a pretty smart guy
you *"seem"* to be pretty petty
No I'm just baffled as to what your point is here, what the relevance of it is - I asked you this yesterday too.
Do you really not see the difference, I mean take it a step further, I have to assume Elon Musk exists, I've never personally met him but I'd have to be living in the Truman show or something if he doesn't.
That this person exists, which isn't even in dispute, is not equivalent to the assumption that their claims are true... which are in dispute.
It's quite plausible that a man might proposition a masseuse, it's quite plausible that a billionaire might proposition a masseuse with a large sum of money or an expensive gift. It's also quite plausible that an employee might become disgruntled at work and knowing they could get a pay out/knowing the proximity they were in to a high profile figure (and the recent stories about this sort of thing + high profile men )make up an accusation.
A poster made the point a while back that there isn't "necessarily" a victim, he was simply referring to the uncertainty around the claim being made. You've added in some apparent narrative to Elon's public statements and concluded that they support the claim when that's just a bad reading of them on your part/making assumptions you can't reasonably make.
So again, it still isn't clear what your point is here - you're surely not arguing that this person doesn't exist? Is this just some prolonged whataboutery because you're miffed that your dubious argument/logic was called out?
You've decided that information provided by one individual is factual and it's not even about them. The actual person specified in the claim didn't say a word for the article. Thus to state that you're ok to take as fact, chunks of the article but not that other bit when it's the same singular source is absurd when you decided to disagree on taking Elon Musks dishonest communications as evidence against him.
No one has confirmed anything besides Elon Musk showing recognition of the story when presented with it then throwing up a wall of denial.
Sorry it’s not clear what you’re disputing or taking issue with here? Can you just be specific - what is your point here?
Do you really not get the issue with your argument that Elon’s statements provide evidence that the incident occurred? Or have your understood that part and you’re just deflecting to some rather tenuous point which you’re keeping vague/don’t seem to want to be specific about despite being asked to clarify more than once.
What part of the article are you taking issue with here. It’s still not clear? Can you not just make your point plainly, maybe quote the article directly if that helps?
Instead of referring to “that other bit” just be clear about what exactly you’re referring to? I’ve read your post thanks, I’m just telling you that it isn’t clear what you’re taking issue with and why it is relevant to this story?
Soldato
Exactly. If it was that easy to get payments out of these million/billionaires, everyone would be doing it. If there was no truth to this Musk would have told her to go public and then bankrupt her in court, much like Trump does by just keeping it in litigation until their funds run out, he has lawyers working for him, I doubt a stewardess does. Why these guys think these incredibly rich and powerful people just roll over and pay up for a fabricated story is beyond me.
Soldato
To be fair dowie you were pushing that video hard, there is no proof its true, the person could be lying through their teeth. Project Veritas has a reputation that is in the gutter yet you use it as evidence. Now when a story comes out that is just as credible, maybe more so as there is evidence of the payment you poo poo it. Sounds like one story suits your narrative while the other doesn't.
Soldato
He has so much money that £250k is nothing to him but settling them does help legitimise her side/story.
Soldato
Don't do it guys.
There were two videos and we’re not talking about disgruntled former employees being publicly critical rather current employees talking uninhibited while apparently being unaware they were being filmed. What they’ve said seems to align with what is known about Twitter already. I know an ex Twitter employee, it doesn’t seem like those two were saying anything out of the ordinary. Have either of them taken back their claims?
That’s rather different to a quite serious sexual harrasment complaint where it’s clearly in dispute. It’s plausible that it did happen but it’s also plausible that someone would lie about such a thing. See the former NY Governor and some of those complaints for example.
ITT the lady was lying because there is a precedent in the world for people lying
Soldato
That is a terrible comparison. So she goes to the police and makes a complaint. Its a he said/she said situation, even for rapes where there is forensic evidence the majority don't end in prosecution and even less end in a conviction and this isn't a rape case. Nothing would happen if she went to the police. I doubt she wanted to continue to work in a job where she would be flying with Musk, so she wanted to be compensated for having to find other work which seems fair enough, plus the fact he's got his dick out and offered her payment for sexual favours, basically making her a prostitute. So you think she should have reported it if true, left her job and be left with no income while she finds a new job and nothing happens to Musk?
Billionaire doesn't = bad Roar, this is a typical statement from you. Bosses getting their dick out and asking for sexual favours for money = bad.
- Status