Twitter adopts 'poison pill' to prevent Elon Musk takeover

[RLLD 4,265]

19 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I get that, my point was you seem to be criticizing politicians while talking about “twitter actions,” when it’s not actually twitter’s actions you’re mad about but rather the politicians

I see the two as intertwined. The reveal of data shows people like Schiff doing inappropriate things, but also too Faucci....and then the FBI....

On the evidence, it appears to suggest that elements of the government were using Twitter, at the very least and likely others, to crush dissention and ensure only one narrative was allowed. I do not care for this behavior.

[TimHauck 2,980]

43 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I see the two as intertwined. The reveal of data shows people like Schiff doing inappropriate things, but also too Faucci....and then the FBI....

On the evidence, it appears to suggest that elements of the government were using Twitter, at the very least and likely others, to crush dissention and ensure only one narrative was allowed. I do not care for this behavior.

But as revealed in the twitter files, most of the time twitter did not acquiesce to the government’s requests.

[RLLD 4,265]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

But as revealed in the twitter files, most of the time twitter did not acquiesce to the government’s requests.

Most of the time....huh, so then if McCarthy is able to get some of the liberal voices on Facebook booted or silenced, you are going to be ok with that?

 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,196]

34 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Most of the time....huh, so then if McCarthy is able to get some of the liberal voices on Facebook booted or silenced, you are going to be ok with that?

 

TimHauck: "It wasn't that many times they did it and when it did happen, all they did was censor voices I disagreed with anyways so no big deal". 

[RLLD 4,265]

8 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

TimHauck: "It wasn't that many times they did it and when it did happen, all they did was censor voices I disagreed with anyways so no big deal". 

It would appear that is the moral stance being taken.

The government, and I am looking at you Adam Schiff you focking coward and traitor, needs to stay the fock out of news and social media.

[craftsman 1,045]

6 minutes ago, RLLD said:

It would appear that is the moral stance being taken.

The government, and I am looking at you Adam Schiff you focking coward and traitor, needs to stay the fock out of news and social media.

I wish Schiff was an enemy of the Clintons. That would put him in his place (of rest). 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,520]

2 hours ago, TimHauck said:

But as revealed in the twitter files, most of the time twitter did not acquiesce to the government’s requests.

Hack is Asshoe

[Strike 5,658]

Facebook too:

 

[TimHauck 2,980]

1 hour ago, RLLD said:

Most of the time....huh, so then if McCarthy is able to get some of the liberal voices on Facebook booted or silenced, you are going to be ok with that?

 

And when they did they argued it was backed up by policy (again, except for the Hunter laptop which was not a government request).  If they do the same thing now then yes I am OK with that, they are a private company after all.  But hopefully they don’t specifically say they won’t censor someone and then do it anyway.  
 

I’m still confused what people wanted twitter to do in the situation from the latest twitter files that were posted.  It sure seems like the GC wanted them to censor twitter posts, but surely that can’t be true, the GC isn’t hypocritical at all right?

[Hardcore troubadour 15,520]

Years long investigation because Russia spent 180k on Facebook ads, to no affect. Democrats co opt Twitter and Facebook, and have the FBI strong arm them and libtards are cool with it. Some very fine people.  

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,374]

3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

But as revealed in the twitter files, most of the time twitter did not acquiesce to the government’s requests.

it wasn't wide spread, and it only occurred in demontards favor so its no biggie

 

[RLLD 4,265]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

And when they did they argued it was backed up by policy (again, except for the Hunter laptop which was not a government request).  If they do the same thing now then yes I am OK with that, they are a private company after all.  But hopefully they don’t specifically say they won’t censor someone and then do it anyway.  
 

I’m still confused what people wanted twitter to do in the situation from the latest twitter files that were posted.  It sure seems like the GC wanted them to censor twitter posts, but surely that can’t be true, the GC isn’t hypocritical at all right?

Government.....does not get to decide what we hear.  This is a core principle.  You may be comfortable allowing it. But I am not.

They do not get to silence people YOU agree with, or disagree with.  Period.  And if they do that they are violating their role.

Please....understand....we do NOT want the government to wield this power. 

[TimHauck 2,980]

1 hour ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

it wasn't wide spread, and it only occurred in demontards favor so its no biggie

 

I don’t know who demontard is, but it was not only in one party’s favor, as the twitter files revealed

[craftsman 1,045]

4 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I don’t know who demontard is, but it was not only in one party’s favor, as the twitter files revealed

One who belongs to the insane liberal collective. So you fit the bill. 

[dogcows 1,030]

11 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Government.....does not get to decide what we hear.  This is a core principle.  You may be comfortable allowing it. But I am not.

They do not get to silence people YOU agree with, or disagree with.  Period.  And if they do that they are violating their role.

Please....understand....we do NOT want the government to wield this power. 

Twitter isn’t the government. You know that, right? They could choose to ban everything the government asks them to, or do the exact opposite, or refuse to even respond to a single email or call from the government. All of that is up to them. The prior management made moderation decisions. Musk is making different ones. If you dislike any of their decisions, don’t patronize the company. Or whine about cancel culture or whatever else makes you cry. It’s up to you. It’s a free country.

[RLLD 4,265]

35 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Twitter isn’t the government. You know that, right? They could choose to ban everything the government asks them to, or do the exact opposite, or refuse to even respond to a single email or call from the government. All of that is up to them. The prior management made moderation decisions. Musk is making different ones. If you dislike any of their decisions, don’t patronize the company. Or whine about cancel culture or whatever else makes you cry. It’s up to you. It’s a free country.

Twitter is not government.  And when government contacted them, if they did JUST ONE thing that was asked, PROBLEM.

And hold the phone, when Musk suspended that liberal reporter your ilk were all up in arms....funny....what it happens TO YOU suddenly liberals are keenly aware of the problem....

And then, if someone dares to raise the alarm, you label it crying....OK, we can play that game....you going to cry about Trump now? You going to cry about Desantis now?

If you want to have voices of concern and objection be "crying" and "whining" it comes back to you, so you all can then STFU about anything you are concerned about/ Does that seem fair?

OF course it is not.  SO long as it all goes YOUR way its all good, but when it comes back...Oh no....not fair.

Like focking toddlers. 

 

[dogcows 1,030]

Just now, RLLD said:

Twitter is not government.  And when government contacted them, if they did JUST ONE thing that was asked, PROBLEM.

And hold the phone, when Musk suspended that liberal reporter your ilk were all up in arms....funny....what it happens TO YOU suddenly liberals are keenly aware of the problem....

And then, if someone dares to raise the alarm, you label it crying....OK, we can play that game....you going to cry about Trump now? You going to cry about Desantis now?

If you want to have voices of concern and objection be "crying" and "whining" it comes back to you, so you all can then STFU about anything you are concerned about/ Does that seem fair?

OF course it is not.  SO long as it all goes YOUR way its all good, but when it comes back...Oh no....not fair.

Like focking toddlers. 

 

Why is Twitter responding to a government request in the way they choose a problem?  You just say PROBLEM in all caps as if that means anything. It doesn’t.

I don’t like how Musk runs Twitter, but I’m not accusing him of violating the constitution. You accuse Twitter’s prior management of that, but you’re as wrong as can be. You clearly don’t understand the constitution in the slightest. If they are violating the constitution, then Fox violated it every time they got then-President Trump on the phone during Fox and Friends.

You can be as mad as you want about the prior management. But they didn’t do anything illegal or unconstitutional. You just disliked it. You should be happy now. Your right-wing troll owns the company now and reinstated wonderful people like sex trafficker Andrew Tate.

[Dizkneelande 1,107]

2 hours ago, craftsman said:

I wish Schiff was an enemy of the Clintons. That would put him in his place (of rest). 

Timscock says he the most honest and credible member of congress. 

[dogcows 1,030]

Just now, Dizkneelande said:

Timscock says he the most honest and credible member of congress. 

If all the Republicans hate him, he’s definitely doing something right.

[Dizkneelande 1,107]

Just now, dogcows said:

If all the Republicans hate him, he’s definitely doing something right.

 You think that way because you’re a stupid person. 

[RLLD 4,265]

9 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Why is Twitter responding to a government request in the way they choose a problem?  You just say PROBLEM in all caps as if that means anything. It doesn’t.

I don’t like how Musk runs Twitter, but I’m not accusing him of violating the constitution. You accuse Twitter’s prior management of that, but you’re as wrong as can be. You clearly don’t understand the constitution in the slightest. If they are violating the constitution, then Fox violated it every time they got then-President Trump on the phone during Fox and Friends.

You can be as mad as you want about the prior management. But they didn’t do anything illegal or unconstitutional. You just disliked it. You should be happy now. Your right-wing troll owns the company now and reinstated wonderful people like sex trafficker Andrew Tate.

Twitter silencing people at the behest of government is a PROBLEM. Government is a problem in general, and the first amendment was put in place to ensure they would not silence voices.  If Twitter wants to do that on their own, fine, but government cannot, should not and better focking not try to intervene. 

I accuse Twitters prior regime of bending to the will of government, and serving the liberal ideology over conservatism.

I understand that constitution fully.  But I also do not allow for liberals OR conservatives to get away with this sh!t.

What concerns me is the inclination to attack people like Trump, or conservatives in general, while not doing the same to Biden and other liberal voices,

All I want, all I have ever wanted is exactly what was done to Trump. I LOVE it that he was put under the microscope, and every day was held to it....they grindined him and it was beautiful...

Now.....DO THAT TO MOTHERFOCKING BIDEN PLEASE....

Politicians.....ARE.....NOT......HEROES....they are scum and need what Trump got every day

[dogcows 1,030]

Just now, RLLD said:

Twitter silencing people at the behest of government is a PROBLEM. Government is a problem in general, and the first amendment was put in place to ensure they would not silence voices.  If Twitter wants to do that on their own, fine, but government cannot, should not and better focking not try to intervene. 

I accuse Twitters prior regime of bending to the will of government, and serving the liberal ideology over conservatism.

I understand that constitution fully.  But I also do not allow for liberals OR conservatives to get away with this sh!t.

What concerns me is the inclination to attack people like Trump, or conservatives in general, while not doing the same to Biden and other liberal voices,

All I want, all I have ever wanted is exactly what was done to Trump. I LOVE it that he was put under the microscope, and every day was held to it....they grindined him and it was beautiful...

Now.....DO THAT TO MOTHERFOCKING BIDEN PLEASE....

No it’s not a problem. Anybody could file a report with Twitter before. Any government, any private individual, any company was allowed to file a report. 

You just disliked their moderation decisions. Too bad. If you don’t like it, start your own social media company. Or better yet, just celebrate that Musk took over and reinstated the right-wing twits you like.

Nobody “got away with” anything. They exercised their freedom of the press to publish or block whatever the heck they wanted, regardless of your hurt feelings. Like I said, they’re free to do it and you’re free to cry about it. Just like I’m free to cry about Musk’s turning Twitter into a dumpster fire if I want.

[RLLD 4,265]

5 minutes ago, dogcows said:

No it’s not a problem. Anybody could file a report with Twitter before. Any government, any private individual, any company was allowed to file a report. 

You just disliked their moderation decisions. Too bad. If you don’t like it, start your own social media company. Or better yet, just celebrate that Musk took over and reinstated the right-wing twits you like.

Nobody “got away with” anything. They exercised their freedom of the press to publish or block whatever the heck they wanted, regardless of your hurt feelings. Like I said, they’re free to do it and you’re free to cry about it. Just like I’m free to cry about Musk’s turning Twitter into a dumpster fire if I want.

I leave their moderation decisions to them, though they were pointedly biased against conservatives. Which is why I left the platform. I did not sue, or seek their cancellation I simply walked away.

It is interesting that the entire "just start your own company" stopped being a thing when Musk bought Twitter, suddenly the protections they thought were permanent were not. So that tired "just start your own company" line has lost some of its thrust....

Twitter got away with plenty, and it is being unwound by Musk, thankfully. And I very much appreciate him outing them. And of course the standard liberal, "there is nothing there" may work on the liberal sheep who have embraced the "do not question" manta....but critical thinkers are still out there and we know that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is a duck, whether a link can be provided or not...

[craftsman 1,045]

25 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

Timscock says he the most honest and credible member of congress. 

Of course he did. 

[jerryskids 6,889]

27 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Why is Twitter responding to a government request in the way they choose a problem?  You just say PROBLEM in all caps as if that means anything. It doesn’t.

I don’t like how Musk runs Twitter, but I’m not accusing him of violating the constitution. You accuse Twitter’s prior management of that, but you’re as wrong as can be. You clearly don’t understand the constitution in the slightest. If they are violating the constitution, then Fox violated it every time they got then-President Trump on the phone during Fox and Friends.

You can be as mad as you want about the prior management. But they didn’t do anything illegal or unconstitutional. You just disliked it. You should be happy now. Your right-wing troll owns the company now and reinstated wonderful people like sex trafficker Andrew Tate.

Musk is a classical liberal, a person who believes in free speech and open discussion. You are a neo Leftist who believes in authoritarian thought control. So you think he is a right wing troll.  HTH

[dogcows 1,030]

14 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I leave their moderation decisions to them, though they were pointedly biased against conservatives. Which is why I left the platform. I did not sue, or seek their cancellation I simply walked away.

It is interesting that the entire "just start your own company" stopped being a thing when Musk bought Twitter, suddenly the protections they thought were permanent were not. So that tired "just start your own company" line has lost some of its thrust....

Twitter got away with plenty, and it is being unwound by Musk, thankfully. And I very much appreciate him outing them. And of course the standard liberal, "there is nothing there" may work on the liberal sheep who have embraced the "do not question" manta....but critical thinkers are still out there and we know that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is a duck, whether a link can be provided or not...

They didn’t “get away with” anything illegal. You just didn’t like their moderation decisions. Oh well.

Musk wants to air the dirty laundry of the company he bought? Cool, go for it Elon!

Where I have an issue is people claiming there was government censorship happening. It didn’t happen. It still isn’t happening on Twitter. The Twitter files keep trying to insinuate that it did, but after 14 episodes of the show, they still haven’t produced the “smoking gun.” That should tell you something.

The whole “Twitter Files” saga is just Musk airing his grievances towards prior management as he flushes billions down the drain. But hey, he’s got the money to burn, so I hope he has fun. It’s just a shame that many who don’t even care about politics will have their platform for selling art or talking about cats or cars dismantled and shut down when the losses become too much for Musk to keep it going,

I like the idea of various message boards (like this one) and perhaps something like Mastodon where multiple servers can link to each other, meaning no one company or person owns it all. Sadly, something like that will probably never be as popular as a one-stop-shop like Facebook or TikTok or Twitter.

[dogcows 1,030]

17 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Musk is a classical liberal, a person who believes in free speech and open discussion. You are a neo Leftist who believes in authoritarian thought control. So you think he is a right wing troll.  HTH

Yep, he is a right wing troll. Do classical liberals tell people to vote Republican in the midterms? That’s a new one to me.

Funny how his dedication to free speech dissolves immediately upon contact with jokes and criticism of him personally.

There is the “persona” of Musk as a free speech advocate. Then you see his actions… and it’s clear they don’t match the rhetoric.

[craftsman 1,045]

6 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Yep, he is a right wing troll. Do classical liberals tell people to vote Republican in the midterms? That’s a new one to me.

Funny how his dedication to free speech dissolves immediately upon contact with jokes and criticism of him personally.

There is the “persona” of Musk as a free speech advocate. Then you see his actions… and it’s clear they don’t match the rhetoric.

Can't deal with it huh? 

[TimHauck 2,980]

49 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Musk … believes in free speech 

Lol

[Strike 5,658]

I have DogCowSh*t on ignore, so thanks for quoting him people.      But, to show how disingenuous his posts are, here is what Musk said regarding people voting for Republicans in the midterms:

Quote

To independent-minded voters: Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress, given that the Presidency is Democratic

To those of us who believe gridlock is the best thing for our government, because it requires BOTH parties to compromise to get anything significant done, this is a no brainer.  It is not indicative of a bias and yes, DogSh*t, a classical liberal would be fine with that statement. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,374]

3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

I don’t know who demontard is, but it was not only in one party’s favor, as the twitter files revealed

Really so you can show me one negative story that was censored about trump on Twitter?

[craftsman 1,045]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Lol

I could understand why it's so hard for the liberal collective to believe that someone can believe in free speech. It's like a guy who lives all his life lying, and he can't believe anyone else could believe that lying is wrong and they don't practice it. It's incomprehensible to that group of people because they have lived their whole lives in that manner. In this case, it's the liberal collective and their censoring. They think of it as a normal way of life, and no one in the world can believe censoring is wrong.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,520]

7 hours ago, dogcows said:

No it’s not a problem. Anybody could file a report with Twitter before. Any government, any private individual, any company was allowed to file a report. 

You just disliked their moderation decisions. Too bad. If you don’t like it, start your own social media company. Or better yet, just celebrate that Musk took over and reinstated the right-wing twits you like.

Nobody “got away with” anything. They exercised their freedom of the press to publish or block whatever the heck they wanted, regardless of your hurt feelings. Like I said, they’re free to do it and you’re free to cry about it. Just like I’m free to cry about Musk’s turning Twitter into a dumpster fire if I want.

You don’t deserve the freedoms you have. Ungrateful toadie 

[TimHauck 2,980]

5 hours ago, craftsman said:

I could understand why it's so hard for the liberal collective to believe that someone can believe in free speech. It's like a guy who lives all his life lying, and he can't believe anyone else could believe that lying is wrong and they don't practice it. It's incomprehensible to that group of people because they have lived their whole lives in that manner. In this case, it's the liberal collective and their censoring. They think of it as a normal way of life, and no one in the world can believe censoring is wrong.

Musk only likes free speech when it suits him.  There have been multiple examples now of him penalizing legal free speech.

[dogcows 1,030]

2 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

You don’t deserve the freedoms you have. Ungrateful toadie 

So now freedom is only for those who YOU think deserve it? And you accuse others of throwing away the constitution….. As always, outstanding commentary, HT.

[RLLD 4,265]

19 minutes ago, dogcows said:

So now freedom is only for those who YOU think deserve it? And you accuse others of throwing away the constitution….. As always, outstanding commentary, HT.

Now that is some irony.....

[jerryskids 6,889]

10 hours ago, dogcows said:

Yep, he is a right wing troll. Do classical liberals tell people to vote Republican in the midterms? That’s a new one to me.

Funny how his dedication to free speech dissolves immediately upon contact with jokes and criticism of him personally.

There is the “persona” of Musk as a free speech advocate. Then you see his actions… and it’s clear they don’t match the rhetoric.

Your Republican crap has been debunked.

Musk, Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, Joe Rogan, Bill Maher... all classical liberals who are trying to tell you that your party has lost its way, it is no longer liberal.  You are probably an old school blue dog who still thinks the Democrats are the party of the working class rust belt unions.  Sorry to break it to you, but you are the pseud party now.

[dogcows 1,030]

1 hour ago, RLLD said:

Now that is some irony.....

You probably understand irony as well as Alanis Morissette. Are you still beating the “Twitter = government censorship” drum?

At some point you have to grasp that social media companies are currently treated by the law as a hybrid between a newspaper and a phone company. They get the protections of a phone company in the sense that they cannot be held liable for stuff said by people talking on the phone. But they are also protected as a newspaper in the sense that they can choose to block any user they want, basically giving them a certain level of editorial control.

Since they’re being treated like a news outlet, one can compare Fox and Friends’ open invitation for Trump to call in at any time when he was president and get softball questions or literally just let him talk about whatever he wanted on the air. I didn’t like it, but that is their prerogative. They had become a de facto free outlet for the POTUS, but hey... that’s their right. If you think Twitter was doing the same thing for libs? I disagree, but I fail to see how you can think it was anything other than distasteful to your political leanings.

Is this a good thing? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe they should be treated just like a phone company and required to carry every conversation, regardless of its content with no editorial control of their own. But that’s not the current law. If you’re angry about it, fuming at social media execs isn’t useful. Advocate to your representatives to fix the law in the way you want to see it fixed. You can even post on those social media sites as part of your advocacy if you want.

[jerryskids 6,889]

10 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Lol

I'm sorry, did he upset you by allowing another dissenting vax voice on his platform. Maybe some "PhD biologist."   

[dogcows 1,030]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

Your Republican crap has been debunked.

Musk, Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, Joe Rogan, Bill Maher... all classical liberals who are trying to tell you that your party has lost its way, it is no longer liberal.  You are probably an old school blue dog who still thinks the Democrats are the party of the working class rust belt unions.  Sorry to break it to you, but you are the pseud party now.

The Republican definition of “classical liberal” is just like their definition of “woke.” It changes to suit their needs. I can see the current definition seems to be people Republicans like that may at one point have been identified as liberals. For example, lots of Republicans think Tulsi Gabbard is/was a liberal. Actual liberals know she never really was.