Twitter adopts 'poison pill' to prevent Elon Musk takeover

[TimHauck 2,876]

3 hours ago, dogcows said:

Reading the responses here, it’s clear that “free speech” is not what it was ever about. As usual, it’s right-wing snowflakes whining that Twitter supposedly persecuted them. And now they’ve got a right-wing billionaire with a fragile ego running the company. He’s changing rules and banning people retroactively, and blocking constitutionally protected speech. Yet you’re cheering this attack on free speech because it’s apparently some kind of revenge on liberals?

Truly sad and pathetic.

I’ll keep watching this thread. I predict when Twitter goes bankrupt, you will blame wokeness or cancel culture, not Musk for running the company into the ground in record time.

Great, now you’re just incentivizing Reality to come in here and tell us the lights are still on everyday…

[Reality 3,121]

15 minutes ago, dogcows said:

One thing I learned from reading the Twitter files and then observing the responses: when people want to see something, they very easily confuse spin with facts. Something for all of us to consider.

A ton of spin is happening, no doubt about that.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,433]

So the FBI did nothing wrong? Is that the takeaway? What did they do right then? 

[Reality 3,121]

8 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

So the FBI did nothing wrong? Is that the takeaway? What did they do right then? 

It happened and it was widespread. Never fear though, we've decided it's not a big deal.

[KSB2424 3,148]

 

[RLLD 4,230]

30 minutes ago, dogcows said:

One thing I learned from reading the Twitter files and then observing the responses: when people want to see something, they very easily confuse spin with facts. Something for all of us to consider.

To this I have to reply with "welcome to the party...." if you are looking in the mirror then you are starting at the right spot.

I see the backlash over Musk suspending some reporters, but note the absence of concern around these twitter revelations. And we know why, it is increasingly clear.

What Twitter did was OK because it was done to those with whom you and your ilk are ideologically opposed.  Therefore you willingly allow things to be done to those people that you will strenuously object to when it is done to those you support.

You are a liberal, and we can now see that liberals are narcissists and bullies.  And the best way to deal with a bully is to give them what they have been dishing out, and watch them become infuriated over it. 

[Djgb13 2,339]

3 hours ago, dogcows said:

This proves my point. It’s not about free speech. It’s about revenge for perceived slights.

Lmfao sure it is. Doesn’t matter that it’s across the board now compared to one side before Musk and everything is fair. Oh noooo. You retarded liberals still up in arms over your little B1tch boys being banned that you can’t help but come on here and whine like the petulant child you are

Does this guy realize how much of a moron he is or does he act like this all the time? 

[TimHauck 2,876]

51 minutes ago, RLLD said:

What Twitter did was OK because it was done to those with whom you and your ilk are ideologically opposed.  Therefore you willingly allow things to be done to those people that you will strenuously object to when it is done to those you support.

Tell me you haven’t read any of the latest twitter files without telling me you haven’t read any of the latest twitter files 

[TimHauck 2,876]

1 hour ago, RLLD said:

Wait a minute, are you suggesting that such a behavior is somehow wrong? I mean, wrong today....but not before? 

I’m not sure what you mean by “wrong.”  He is certainly welcome to “change his mind,” it’s a free country, it just makes him a hypocrite.  I replied to your earlier post because you were talking about “objecting” to things.  I think hypocrisy should be objected to.  And so do most here, just only when it comes from the libs.

[RLLD 4,230]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

I’m not sure what you mean by “wrong.”  He is certainly welcome to “change his mind,” it’s a free country, it just makes him a hypocrite.  I replied to your earlier post because you were talking about “objecting” to things.  I think hypocrisy should be objected to.  And so do most here, just only when it comes from the libs.

No, it is rather clear that Twitter was allowed to pretend it was not doing inappropriate things and lying about it, which is hypocritical  but hide behind some notion of virtuosity.... hey wait, THAT is what Musk is doing back to them....and look at the backlash, almost as if....they knew all along what Twitter was doing was wrong....hell, they even did the "Conspiracy Theory" two step....all we need now is the "that is in the past, how does worrying about it help people now".....sidestep....

[Strike 5,544]

Here are some other accounts that were restored on Twitter.  There accounts were suspended much longer than the most recent "lib 6."  Sure would have been nice of those of you outraged by the lib 6 suspensions had made the same pleas when these accounts were suspended.  No hypocrisy there lol.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/12/welcome-back-trends-as-twitter-restores-james-okeefe-and-dozens-of-other-banned-accounts/

 

[TimHauck 2,876]

1 hour ago, RLLD said:

No, it is rather clear that Twitter was allowed to pretend it was not doing inappropriate things and lying about it, which is hypocritical  but hide behind some notion of virtuosity.... hey wait, THAT is what Musk is doing back to them....and look at the backlash, almost as if....they knew all along what Twitter was doing was wrong....hell, they even did the "Conspiracy Theory" two step....all we need now is the "that is in the past, how does worrying about it help people now".....sidestep....

Once again, you’re missing the point.   The reason for the “outrage” against Musk is because he specifically said new twitter was going to be so much better than old twitter.  By claiming “well old twitter did stuff like this too!” you’re proving him wrong, because new twitter isn’t all that much different than old twitter, just now Musk gets to own the libs.  

Meanwhile you have idiots like Strike that will say he’s being “even-handed” for applying newly created policies to accounts retroactively, lol.

[dogcows 1,030]

4 hours ago, RLLD said:

but note the absence of concern around these twitter revelations.

What revelations? I read the Twitter files, and learned nothing new other than the reason for James Woods’ suspension was Hunter Biden d1ck pix.

And don’t forget: we know Trump’s team sent takedown requests during his presidency. But those emails were NOT shared as part of this supposed exposé. That is a huge tell that you’re only seeing snippets, carefully chosen to tell a story Musk wants to tell.

Another huge tell was that Taibbi couldn’t actually prove any political bias in mods’ choices, even with internal emails and slack threads. So he put up a chart showing overall political contributions by employees as a whole and spun that into suggesting that would lead to political biases in moderation. That is just one example of the spin in the Twitter files extravaganza.

[Strike 5,544]

"Old" Twitter was littered with former FBI officials in high level positions:

https://nypost.com/2022/12/17/twitter-leadership-full-of-former-fbi-agents-linkedin-records-show/

[dogcows 1,030]

25 minutes ago, Strike said:

"Old" Twitter was littered with former FBI officials in high level positions:

https://nypost.com/2022/12/17/twitter-leadership-full-of-former-fbi-agents-linkedin-records-show/

So? Why wouldn’t you want former law enforcement working on your company’s security? Of course, 7500 employees and maybe a dozen or less are former FBI? Yeah it’s an epidemic!

Wait, I’ll answer it for you to save you the trouble.

”FBI DEEP STATE CONSPIRACY!!!”

Ever notice this hate of the FBI exploded after Trump stole classified documents and the FBI came to get them? Lots of people still in love with Trump here.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,433]

Facebook and Google are full of ex fbi and cia too. 

[TimHauck 2,876]

Welp, looks like Bari Weiss probably isn’t getting access to any more twitter files.  
 

 

 

 

[Alias Detective 1,401]

8 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Facebook and Google are full of ex fbi and cia too. 

A lot of ex cops work security and other jobs too.

[TimHauck 2,876]

On 12/16/2022 at 9:16 PM, TimHauck said:

were there any examples where Twitter took action when they shouldn’t have?

Bump.  Or is the GC just sticking with the "it's obvious!!!" argument?

So I just got a chance to read it a little closer.  A few more comments:

-Taibbi says there were "over 150" e-mails between the FBI and Roth over 35 months, including some saying happy New Year.  So an average of a little over 4 a month, with some of them being mundane according to Taibbi.  Lol, that's nothing.

-In tweets 12-17, he talks about 6 accounts flagged by the FBI.  2 of those were not suspended.   The only tweet screenshots provided by Taibbi...were from those 2 accounts.   Initially I was thinking this was for "nefarious reasons," but it actually just looks like he didn't do his research very well.  I don't believe there were any screenshots in the whole thread from the suspended accounts...just a screenshot showing that the account was suspended, which doesn't really prove anything of course. 

-In a separate tweet, Taibbi claims the FBI was doing this "instead of chasing child predators or terrorists"...as if they can't have people doing both??   Sure, you can criticize the FBI for wasting taxpayer money on this (particularly in flagging joke accounts or those with limited engagement), but that doesn't mean there was a conspiracy with twitter (in fact based on the thread it looks like they usually did not suspend the joke accounts).

[TimHauck 2,876]

12 hours ago, Strike said:

Here are some other accounts that were restored on Twitter.  There accounts were suspended much longer than the most recent "lib 6."  Sure would have been nice of those of you outraged by the lib 6 suspensions had made the same pleas when these accounts were suspended.  No hypocrisy there lol.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/12/welcome-back-trends-as-twitter-restores-james-okeefe-and-dozens-of-other-banned-accounts/

 

So great to have Steve Kirsch back with tweets like these:

 

He sounds like the GC with regurgitating "what someone told him" without verifying it.  What happened to "do your own research"?

And no, I'm not saying he should be suspended for this tweet.

 

[TimHauck 2,876]

On 12/16/2022 at 11:22 AM, TimHauck said:

At 7:30 Tim admits the information was “technically” publicly available.

Even if it wasn’t, Elon would have known that already and still doesn’t explain him specifically saying he would not ban the account (acknowledging the security risk) but then doing it anyway.

bump @RaiderHaters Revenge.   Again, Musk knew that Sweeney was getting "private" information the whole time, and yet still said that "free speech extends even to not banning the account tracking my plane."  So you're saying Musk was wrong when he said that?

[dogcows 1,030]

2 hours ago, TimHauck said:

So great to have Steve Kirsch back with tweets like these:

 

He sounds like the GC with regurgitating "what someone told him" without verifying it.  What happened to "do your own research"?

And no, I'm not saying he should be suspended for this tweet.

 

When somebody posts something that stupid, I think blocking/suspending is counterproductive. Just leave the moronic comment out there for all to see.

Twitter made some bad judgment calls on moderation in the past, but the current policy of banning whoever hurt Elon’s feelings is infinitely worse.

[jerryskids 6,799]

14 hours ago, dogcows said:

What revelations? I read the Twitter files, and learned nothing new other than the reason for James Woods’ suspension was Hunter Biden d1ck pix.

And don’t forget: we know Trump’s team sent takedown requests during his presidency. But those emails were NOT shared as part of this supposed exposé. That is a huge tell that you’re only seeing snippets, carefully chosen to tell a story Musk wants to tell.

Another huge tell was that Taibbi couldn’t actually prove any political bias in mods’ choices, even with internal emails and slack threads. So he put up a chart showing overall political contributions by employees as a whole and spun that into suggesting that would lead to political biases in moderation. That is just one example of the spin in the Twitter files extravaganza.

Ah, the classic Leftist "we already knew all of this!"  You knew that that many 3-letter agencies had huge direct pipes into Twitter?  And that they met regularly?  

I'll add that I heard Taibbi speak about your second paragraph; he does not "know" about Trump requests -- he reported as such because he had multiple sources told him they existed, so he thought it would be in the interest of journalistic integrity to report that they did.  He has not personally seen any such requests.  So, you can speculate that Elon has them and is sitting on them ( @TimHauck would never speculate btw, so he would be forced to conclude that the Trump camp never made such requests).

BTW if you've been following, I've consistently said that I don't think there is an email from the FBI or security agencies titled "Re:  our manipulation of the election and destruction of 1A".  They are too smart to do that, and besides, after Zuck smoked a doob with Rogan and let it slip that they warned FB about Hunter misinfo, I'm confident the agencies locked that stuff down at the other big tech companies.

[BuckSwope 654]

3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

bump @RaiderHaters Revenge.   Again, Musk knew that Sweeney was getting "private" information the whole time, and yet still said that "free speech extends even to not banning the account tracking my plane."  So you're saying Musk was wrong when he said that?

It's also interesting seeing a group that is largely about the traditional family unit rallying around a dude with 10 kids with multiple moms who didn't bother to address something he acknowledged was a safety threat until one of his kids was involved.   What a hero!!   I guess anything goes if you are "owning the libs".   

He's only worth 100s billions.  I guess that $50k was too steep to protect himself and his family.   All he had to do was pay the twerp Day 1 when he knew it was an issue and change the policy like he did afterwards so that practice isn't allowed on Twitter.   Pretty quick and easy solution.  The college kid is happy, Musk's family is safe, and he doesn't look as much like a tool.  

[Reality 3,121]

15 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

It's also interesting seeing a group that is largely about the traditional family unit rallying around a dude with 10 kids with multiple moms who didn't bother to address something he acknowledged was a safety threat until one of his kids was involved.   What a hero!!   I guess anything goes if you are "owning the libs".   

He's only worth 100s billions.  I guess that $50k was too steep to protect himself and his family.   All he had to do was pay the twerp Day 1 when he knew it was an issue and change the policy like he did afterwards so that practice isn't allowed on Twitter.   Pretty quick and easy solution.  The college kid is happy, Musk's family is safe, and he doesn't look as much like a tool.  

This is such a stupid take, do people like this actually exist?

[Strike 5,544]

2 minutes ago, Reality said:

This is such a stupid take, do people like this actually exist?

It's just what you get when you have people who start with the conclusion and work backwards, making the story fit that conclusion, instead of using logic and available data to form your conclusion.

[dogcows 1,030]

More free speech:

https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/social-platforms-policy

Quote

We know that many of our users may be active on other social media platforms; however, going forward, Twitter will no longer allow free promotion of specific social media platforms on Twitter.

Quote

Prohibited platforms:

Facebook, Instagram, Mastodon, Truth Social, Tribel, Post and Nostr

3rd-party social media link aggregators such as linktr.ee, lnk.bio

Examples: 

“follow me @username on Instagram”

“username@mastodon.social”

“check out my profile on Facebook - facebook.com/username”

 

[dogcows 1,030]

2 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Ah, the classic Leftist "we already knew all of this!"  You knew that that many 3-letter agencies had huge direct pipes into Twitter?  And that they met regularly?  

I'll add that I heard Taibbi speak about your second paragraph; he does not "know" about Trump requests -- he reported as such because he had multiple sources told him they existed, so he thought it would be in the interest of journalistic integrity to report that they did.  He has not personally seen any such requests.  So, you can speculate that Elon has them and is sitting on them ( @TimHauck would never speculate btw, so he would be forced to conclude that the Trump camp never made such requests).

BTW if you've been following, I've consistently said that I don't think there is an email from the FBI or security agencies titled "Re:  our manipulation of the election and destruction of 1A".  They are too smart to do that, and besides, after Zuck smoked a doob with Rogan and let it slip that they warned FB about Hunter misinfo, I'm confident the agencies locked that stuff down at the other big tech companies.

The go-to of every conspiracy theorist. “They” are always too smart to leave any trace of what they did, but somehow you know “they” did it.

[dogcows 1,030]

2 hours ago, jerryskids said:

I'll add that I heard Taibbi speak about your second paragraph; he does not "know" about Trump requests -- he reported as such because he had multiple sources told him they existed, so he thought it would be in the interest of journalistic integrity to report that they did.

Can you link his statement? I don’t see any correction on this tweet. If he doesn’t know, he certainly is presenting it as a fact anyway. And if he believes it to be true, why didn’t he demand proof from Twitter one way or the other on it before agreeing to this arrangement?

 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,433]

40 minutes ago, Reality said:

This is such a stupid take, do people like this actually exist?

Yup. They’re usually called teenagers. Grabbing any excuse they can.  

[RLLD 4,230]

18 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Once again, you’re missing the point.   The reason for the “outrage” against Musk is because he specifically said new twitter was going to be so much better than old twitter.  By claiming “well old twitter did stuff like this too!” you’re proving him wrong, because new twitter isn’t all that much different than old twitter, just now Musk gets to own the libs.  

Meanwhile you have idiots like Strike that will say he’s being “even-handed” for applying newly created policies to accounts retroactively, lol.

I get the why.

I suggest this....liberals simply apologize for the mistreatment toward conservatives and ask that the same treatment not be brought back to them.

[RLLD 4,230]

18 hours ago, dogcows said:

What revelations? I read the Twitter files, and learned nothing new other than the reason for James Woods’ suspension was Hunter Biden d1ck pix.

And don’t forget: we know Trump’s team sent takedown requests during his presidency. But those emails were NOT shared as part of this supposed exposé. That is a huge tell that you’re only seeing snippets, carefully chosen to tell a story Musk wants to tell.

Another huge tell was that Taibbi couldn’t actually prove any political bias in mods’ choices, even with internal emails and slack threads. So he put up a chart showing overall political contributions by employees as a whole and spun that into suggesting that would lead to political biases in moderation. That is just one example of the spin in the Twitter files extravaganza.

And this is where we depart......if you intend to use the "you cant prove it" defense I doubt we can have a forthright discussion about this topic. 

[jerryskids 6,799]

43 minutes ago, dogcows said:

The go-to of every conspiracy theorist. “They” are always too smart to leave any trace of what they did, but somehow you know “they” did it.

Do you dispute that the FBI told Facebook to look specifically for Hunter Biden misinfo?

And presuming not:  do you believe they would have that discussion with FB but not Twitter, with whom we've established they had a strong relationship?

[jerryskids 6,799]

29 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Can you link his statement? I don’t see any correction on this tweet. If he doesn’t know, he certainly is presenting it as a fact anyway. And if he believes it to be true, why didn’t he demand proof from Twitter one way or the other on it before agreeing to this arrangement?

 

He has no intention to correct it; it wasn't an "error," I explained his reasoning.

I'll see what I can do on a link.  I heard it on a podcast that Taibbi and Walter Kern do together, "America This Week."  My wife pays for a subscription; I don't even know where to find it.  

[dogcows 1,030]

18 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

He has no intention to correct it; it wasn't an "error," I explained his reasoning.

I'll see what I can do on a link.  I heard it on a podcast that Taibbi and Walter Kern do together, "America This Week."  My wife pays for a subscription; I don't even know where to find it.  

If he is certain it’s true, at the very least, he should have asked for an official comment from Twitter to confirm or deny it. And since they were handing him emails to post, he should also have insisted they provide the ones from the Trump WH. And if they refused, he should have said so. Since he didn’t, I assume he’s ok with not getting that info… or that Twitter asked him to just let it go. He could have reached out to former Trump officials for a comment. He could also have filed a FOIA request for the takedown emails.

These are all basic steps a journalist would normally take when handling a story like this. Instead of doing them, Taibbi seems content to just regurgitate the info Musk authorized him to see.

There might be good reasons for him to have handled it this way, so I’d be interested to hear him explain. Maybe I can find that podcast.

[dogcows 1,030]

45 minutes ago, RLLD said:

And this is where we depart......if you intend to use the "you cant prove it" defense I doubt we can have a forthright discussion about this topic. 

Millions of people vote. Many contribute to political campaigns. We shouldn’t assume this means they are automatically biased to the extent they’d violate professional ethics. Yet this is what Taibbi asks readers to infer when he presents that data as part of his Twitter thread.

[Reality 3,121]

33 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Do you dispute that the FBI told Facebook to look specifically for Hunter Biden misinfo?

And presuming not:  do you believe they would have that discussion with FB but not Twitter, with whom we've established they had a strong relationship?

You're asking them to apply common sense, they've proven time and time again that they simply don't possess it. 

[jerryskids 6,799]

4 minutes ago, dogcows said:

If he is certain it’s true, at the very least, he should have asked for an official comment from Twitter to confirm or deny it. And since they were handing him emails to post, he should also have insisted they provide the ones from the Trump WH. And if they refused, he should have said so. Since he didn’t, I assume he’s ok with not getting that info… or that Twitter asked him to just let it go. He could have reached out to former Trump officials for a comment. He could also have filed a FOIA request for the takedown emails.

These are all basic steps a journalist would normally take when handling a story like this. Instead of doing them, Taibbi seems content to just regurgitate the info Musk authorized him to see.

There might be good reasons for him to have handled it this way, so I’d be interested to hear him explain. Maybe I can find that podcast.

 

My sense was that he wanted to err on the side of appeasing your blue check sky screamer journalists, the borg of which all called him doing free marketing for the world's richest man$#@!  I suppose he could have filed an FOIA request; he probably would have gotten a response in 15 minutes or so.   

[jerryskids 6,799]

38 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Do you dispute that the FBI told Facebook to look specifically for Hunter Biden misinfo?

And presuming not:  do you believe they would have that discussion with FB but not Twitter, with whom we've established they had a strong relationship?

Bump for @dogcows

[dogcows 1,030]

14 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

 

My sense was that he wanted to err on the side of appeasing your blue check sky screamer journalists, the borg of which all called him doing free marketing for the world's richest man$#@!  I suppose he could have filed an FOIA request; he probably would have gotten a response in 15 minutes or so.   

Any of the actions I mentioned would have increased his credibility. Showing only takedown emails from liberals makes it seem like he is targeting one side only. Just saying “Twitter didn’t provide emails from Trump” or “Twitter refused to comment” or “I put in a FOIA request which is pending” would say that he isn’t biased. None would have been difficult to do. So why not? Again, perhaps he addresses this somehow and I haven’t seen or heard it.