Elon Musk and Twitter Reach Deal for Sale (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    SaintForLife

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages
    5,415
    Reaction score
    2,567
    Location
    Madisonville
    Offline
    Elon Musk struck a deal on Monday to buy Twitter for roughly $44 billion, in a victory by the world’s richest man to take over the influential social network frequented by world leaders, celebrities and cultural trendsetters.

    Twitter agreed to sell itself to Mr. Musk for $54.20 a share, a 38 percent premium over the company’s share price this month before he revealed he was the firm’s single largest shareholder. It would be the largest deal to take a company private — something Mr. Musk has said he will do with Twitter — in at least two decades, according to data compiled by Dealogic.

    “Free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated,” Mr. Musk said in a statement announcing the deal. “Twitter has tremendous potential — I look forward to working with the company and the community of users to unlock it.”

    The deal, which has been unanimously approved by Twitter’s board, is expected to close this year, subject to a vote of Twitter shareholders and certain regulatory approvals.

    The blockbuster agreement caps what had seemed an improbable attempt by the famously mercurial Mr. Musk, 50, to buy the social media company — and immediately raises questions about what he will do with the platform and how his actions will affect online speech globally.




    If Musk does what he claims he wants to do it will be a big improvement and good for free speech.
     
    Don’t get hung up on the 10 year part (I could have said 5 years, 15 years, or 11 years). Did either of you watch the movie 21 Jump Street (if you didn’t, don’t worry, you aren’t missing out)?

    The first day that Jonah Hill and Channing Tatums characters go undercover Tatum is calling people at school names that were perhaps acceptable when he was in HS, but are now no longer acceptable. The groups that were cool now were not the same groups that were cool then?

    Heck, you have both seen it in your life I am sure. The world keeps changing, and what was once socially acceptable before, is no longer acceptable.
    So if someone says a slur in the present day, it's no biggie because a lot of people used to say what they said in the past and a lot of people might say the same thing in the future? That seems to sum up what you're trying to say.
     
    I think that he was making a joke, at least I hope he was, because how are you going to allow someone to recognize you as something that you don’t recognize?
    See, the thing is, it's a tenuous joke (at best) that relies implicitly on ignorance and bigotry.

    It tries to draw an equivalence between "not recognising the term cis", and not accepting how someone identifies.

    But those aren't the same thing. They're objecting to the term cis, not the meaning as such. That is, they're not saying, "Don't call me cis, because I'm trans." They're not disputing that they're not trans, they're attacking the term itself.

    Whereas a trans man may object to being called a woman because they're telling you they're not a woman, that's not who they are. They have no objection at all to the word 'woman', it's just not who they are.

    Those are fundamentally different things.

    But then you have to ask the question of why would anyone object to the use of a word that means, essentially, "not trans", and draw equivalences like that, and it's increasingly apparent from context and behaviour that it's because when they say they "don't recognise the term", they're attacking the concept. That is, they don't accept the term "cis", and the concept of being "not trans", because they're rejecting the entire concept of being trans, and the existence of trans people.

    Which is bad.
     
    On a lighter note, evidently the cage match between Zuck and Musk has been agreed on. I didn’t think that was real, but it seems it is:

     
    So if someone says a slur in the present day, it's no biggie because a lot of people used to say what they said in the past and a lot of people might say the same thing in the future? That seems to sum up what you're trying to say.
    What I am saying is that over time what is acceptable may no longer be acceptable. That’s all.
     
    On a lighter note, evidently the cage match between Zuck and Musk has been agreed on. I didn’t think that was real, but it seems it is:


    I didn’t bookmark it, but I saw a tweet that Musk‘s mom has canceled the cage match. 🤣
     
    What I am saying is that over time what is acceptable may no longer be acceptable. That’s all.
    What's acceptable in the future or the past is irrelevant to what's acceptable in the present. Right now, what Elon Musk is doing and allowing others to do is unacceptable, regardless of the past or the future.

    If you find what he's doing and allowing unacceptable, why not just say that? If you find it acceptable, why not just say that?
     
    What's acceptable in the future or the past is irrelevant to what's acceptable in the present. Right now, what Elon Musk is doing and allowing others to do is unacceptable, regardless of the past or the future.

    If you find what he's doing and allowing unacceptable, why not just say that? If you find it acceptable, why not just say that?
    I am indifferent to what hMusk is allowing/not allowing. It’s not my platform, what do I care? If the platform disappeared tomorrow I would find somewhere else to find my Saints and Pels news, and the world would start healing if we are being honest with ourselves. If the fight between Zuck and Musk did happen I would be pull for the Rapture.

    I see no problem with people accepting or not accepting labels such as “Cis”, do you?
     
    If the platform disappeared tomorrow I would find somewhere else to find my Saints and Pels news, and the world would start healing if we are being honest with ourselves.
    I agree with you and the fact that the world has to heal from what Elon Musk is doing and allowing on twitter means that it's unacceptable. I don't know why you can't bring yourself to say it's unacceptable, when you recognize it's causing damage in the world.
    I see no problem with people accepting or not accepting labels such as “Cis”, do you?
    It's completely acceptable for a person that perceives themselves as having the same biological sex as their gender to ask people not to refer directly to them as cis.

    Blasting a tweet to everyone on twitter that they reject being referring to as cis is grandstanding. It's not a sincere request that people not refer to them as cis. It's a petulant protest against anyone using the word cis at all.

    He and others that try to hide behind pretzel-twisted and evasive language aren't fooling anyone in regards to what they're really trying to communicate. It's made obvious by how much effort they make to communicate what they mean without actually saying what they mean.
     
    I saw this comment and I think it’s true: people think the word “cis” is a slur because they use the word “trans” as a slur.
     
    I saw this comment and I think it’s true: people think the word “cis” is a slur because they use the word “trans” as a slur.
    Thanks for pointing that out. They see cis as an insult, because they think trans is an insult.

    The guy's tweet that he didn't want to be labeled cis was retaliatory, it was not a simple, sincere request to not be personally referred to as cis.
     
    Hmmm. Evidently there is a fake account posting stuff that is purportedly from a progressive, but it’s just to rile up the right wing extremists.



     
    I'm putting this here only because it's Musk's doing, but it applies to every thread.

    We don't realize how much we rely on posting tweets instead of other news sources. I don't have a twitter account and am not signing up for one, so now I can't see most of what people are talking about and linking to.

    Hopefully the gravity of Zuckerberg's and Musk's ginormous egos physically clashing will create a momentary rift in space-time that will suck both of them into a universe made up entirely of feces, an infinite expanse of nothing but the most foul feces imaginable.

     
    I'm putting this here only because it's Musk's doing, but it applies to every thread.

    We don't realize how much we rely on posting tweets instead of other news sources. I don't have a twitter account and am not signing up for one, so now I can't see most of what people are talking about and linking to.

    Hopefully the gravity of Zuckerberg's and Musk's ginormous egos physically clashing will create a momentary rift in space-time that will suck both of them into a universe made up entirely of feces, an infinite expanse of nothing but the most foul feces imaginable.

    Interesting mental image. Until it happens, why not simply get a Twitter account so that you can see most of what people are talking about and linking to?
     
    Hmmm. Evidently there is a fake account posting stuff that is purportedly from a progressive, but it’s just to rile up the right wing extremists.




    Update: Twitter has finally suspended the fake account after numerous people with high visibility called them out for allowing it to go on.
     
    Sucks not being able to click on Tweets anymore. But there are no Tweets worth signing up for Twitter for. I guess the advertisers love the loss of clicks.
     
    I agree with you and the fact that the world has to heal from what Elon Musk is doing and allowing on twitter means that it's unacceptable. I don't know why you can't bring yourself to say it's unacceptable, when you recognize it's causing damage in the world.

    It's completely acceptable for a person that perceives themselves as having the same biological sex as their gender to ask people not to refer directly to them as cis.

    Blasting a tweet to everyone on twitter that they reject being referring to as cis is grandstanding. It's not a sincere request that people not refer to them as cis. It's a petulant protest against anyone using the word cis at all.

    He and others that try to hide behind pretzel-twisted and evasive language aren't fooling anyone in regards to what they're really trying to communicate. It's made obvious by how much effort they make to communicate what they mean without actually saying what they mean.
    Why would anyone refer to someone else as "cis?" What it the reason to make the distinction, and how do you tell if someone is "cis?" Why would you say, "that cis man over there," instead of "that man over there," unless you think there is an important difference.

    It won't be long before non-cis people will be able to simply identify as cis. They are able now, they just haven't thought of it yet. When they do, they will go on dating sites and say, "oh yes, I'm a cis woman." Then when the third date goes badly, they will blame transphobia.

    This woman says she is a biological female. She explains it to the host using the logic of transgenderization.

    2:50



    To summarize her logic, she says WTTE of "I'm female, I'm made of biological stuff, so I'm a biological female."

    Just as now, women's rights advocates find themselves at a disadvantage due being no longer allowed to know what a "woman" is, soon transgender rights advocates will no longer be able to define what a transgender person is.

    I'm curious myself. What is a transgender person transitioning from and what are they transitioning to?
     
    Why would anyone refer to someone else as "cis?" What it the reason to make the distinction, and how do you tell if someone is "cis?" Why would you say, "that cis man over there," instead of "that man over there," unless you think there is an important difference.

    It won't be long before non-cis people will be able to simply identify as cis. They are able now, they just haven't thought of it yet. When they do, they will go on dating sites and say, "oh yes, I'm a cis woman." Then when the third date goes badly, they will blame transphobia.

    This woman says she is a biological female. She explains it to the host using the logic of transgenderization.

    2:50



    To summarize her logic, she says WTTE of "I'm female, I'm made of biological stuff, so I'm a biological female."

    Just as now, women's rights advocates find themselves at a disadvantage due being no longer allowed to know what a "woman" is, soon transgender rights advocates will no longer be able to define what a transgender person is.

    I'm curious myself. What is a transgender person transitioning from and what are they transitioning to?

    Um, no, you are not “curious” so don’t waste bandwidth with that nonsense.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom