𝕏 / Twitter / X, the Social Media Platform Formerly Known as Twitter / "MUSK OWNS TWITTER"

[BiggerChungus]

Why do you keep peddling this false notion that i think Musk is my friend? I don't consider him one. What i do consider him is, smart. One smart enough not to do rug pulls about it all. You think after staking his personal reputation, allowing every leftist hit journo throw out hot takes He is going to suddenly going to go "haha guys tricked you i am working for the jews enjoy the double ban hammer from my platform". He said what he is going to do himself. Both the far left and right are his enemy's and will throw both sides in to the oven. So a troon is going to be just as angry as a red pill faggot stormfag.
The thing is all you are doing is purity testing. What would he need to do to prove he is not working for Jews in your eyes? Give you his blood? Stop being a broke brained faggot about everything that happens and count your blessings.

The fuck are you even talking about?

 

[NetVet]

Musk gonna tweet his way into the oval office by 2028.

This really sounds like a prep for something of those sorts? Could it be?

I mean, I have to quote good ole Bushy here: fool me once, can't be fooled again? Or however he fumbled that line. But yeah, I personally fell (for almost 2 years) for Trump meme and hoped something gonna happen, that the ship will be steered. It was hard to admit I was 100% duped, but I came to my senses around 2018.

Is this Musk guy gonna be the same? Final cope hope for da whitey? We can't be that naive...r-right?

Also, topic related question and 100% serious one - did the "muh free speech muh reeeeee speech" rules changed on that shit site? Can I reply "fuck you perv" to a tranny and not get swatted by Blackwater?

 

[MuuMuu Bunnylips]

UhhhhREEEEEEEEEEEEEE

 

[DoubleD]

I waited to post this because the thread was moving fast, and I'm still amazed that people like this exist, thinking he can explain away free speech with an appeal to the Tragedy Of The Commons™.

Yes, people should be free to speak, even objectionable speech.

Okay, cool. Well in that case, the argument should have ended there. But he goes on to argue that lack of restrictions on what people say ultimately robs Twitter users of their ability to have curated spaces without objectionable speech. Kiwi Farms even gets a shout-out towards the end.


(archive)

In this analogy, he compares Twitter being unusable due to large amounts of objectionable content to every single movie theater being unusable due to objectionable content. And at the risk of stating the obvious, that has never been the free speech position at all. Even the most extreme of free-speech absolutists agree there needs to be some social settings and spaces in which speech of a certain type is forbidden (you can't spout edgy atheist rhetoric inside your local mosque, you can't call your grandmother a cunt over Christmas dinner – if you do, then expect to get removed from those spaces).

He'd probably say the same principle applies when it comes to Twitter censoring people, and being silenced on one platform is not the same as being silenced on every single platform and/or social setting. And he may in fact be right, if not for the fact that: 1) not every, but almost all major social platforms censor far more than they need to, and it's almost impossible to have an presence online without using them, 2) the standards are applied asymmetrically to favour the political left, often in coordinated ways.

And 3) – perhaps most importantly – his side absolutely does want to remove objectionable content from other social settings, including restricting what people say in their own homes. And if you think I'm exaggerating, look no further than Scotland's new hate crime law (archive). Now, just in case I'm accidentally stawmanning this Funken Idaho's position, I should clarify that I don't actually know if he endorses censorship to this degree. With the benefit of the doubt, he might actually be against this specific form of censorship. But given that he seems to take issue with us making fun of people in our own little space on the internet (or he's bought into the narrative that this never stays on the Farms), it's hard to imagine him being cool with people having bigoted opinions in spaces that the social justice left doesn't (yet) control.

TL;DR "you can say whatever you want, as long as you don't direct it at anyone" and I'm so fucking tired of being lectured from this point of view on free speech.

 

[Foghorns at a Funeral]

The fuck are you even talking about?

Oh come on, don't admit defeat that easily. You have been saying that Musk has been compromised. I asked for proof, you could not give me anything. Then you went on a rant about how "cynical" you are. Come on. At least show us proof of Musks supposed duplicity. I asked very politely and you have deflected over a series of posts about it.

 

[BiggerChungus]

Oh come on, don't admit defeat that easily. You have been saying that Musk has been compromised. I asked for proof, you could not give me anything. Then you went on a rant about how "cynical" you are. Come on. At least show us proof of Musks supposed duplicity. I asked very politely and you have deflected over a series of posts about it.

You keep talking about "Jews and banhammers" like a 4/pol/ word salad. You asked for "proof" of Musk "working with the Jews" in the form of "emails or napkins", then acted like a genius because, shocker, I don't have any leaked emails saying Musk is a corrupt businessman in league with other corrupt businessmen.

 

[incelistan]

I waited to post this because the thread was moving fast, and I'm still amazed that people like this exist, thinking he can explain away free speech with an appeal to the Tragedy Of The Commons™.


Okay, cool. Well in that case, the argument should have ended there. But he goes on to argue that lack of restrictions on what people say ultimately robs Twitter users of their ability to have curated spaces without objectionable speech. Kiwi Farms even gets a shout-out towards the end.

View attachment 3237138
(archive)

In this analogy, he compares Twitter being unusable due to large amounts of objectionable content to every single movie theater being unusable due to objectionable content. And at the risk of stating the obvious, that has never been the free speech position at all. Even the most extreme of free-speech absolutists agree there needs to be some social settings and spaces in which speech of a certain type is forbidden (you can't spout edgy atheist rhetoric inside your local mosque, you can't call your grandmother a cunt over Christmas dinner – if you do, then expect to get removed from those spaces).

He'd probably say the same principle applies when it comes to Twitter censoring people, and being silenced on one platform is not the same as being silenced on every single platform and/or social setting. And he may in fact be right, if not for the fact that: 1) not every, but almost all major social platforms censor far more than they need to, and it's almost impossible to have an presence online without using them, 2) the standards are applied asymmetrically to favour the political left, often in coordinated ways.

And 3) – perhaps most importantly – his side absolutely does want to remove objectionable content from other social settings, including restricting what people say in their own homes. And if you think I'm exaggerating, look no further than Scotland's new hate crime law (archive). Now, just in case I'm accidentally stawmanning this Funken Idaho's position, I should clarify that I don't actually know if he endorses censorship to this degree. With the benefit of the doubt, he might actually be against this specific form of censorship. But given that he seems to take issue with us making fun of people in our own little space on the internet (or he's bought into the narrative that this never stays on the Farms), it's hard to imagine him being cool with people having bigoted opinions in spaces that the social justice left doesn't (yet) control.

TL;DR "you can say whatever you want, as long as you don't direct it at anyone" and I'm so fucking tired of being lectured from this point of view on free speech.

'Hurting people's feelings on Twitter is like disrupting a play by screaming in the middle.'

If people screamed in the middle of most dour modern plays, it would actually improve the experience. However, the issue there is more of a practical matter to allow the play to continue, while removing 'offensive' speech or 'misinformation' is not, because social media is mostly just a bunch of people talking. It's like saying that votes in elections should be discounted when they are for the 'wrong,' 'offensive' candidate, because that would disrupt some imaginary play in which your candidate wins.

Literally makes one wonder where these people live, since they never encounter anyone that lies, hurts their feelings, or makes them upset at all. Since that would probably disrupt the world and prevent it from existing, according to them.

 

[Netizennameless]

This really sounds like a prep for something of those sorts? Could it be?

No it couldn't. Musk isn't a natural born citizen and thus is ineligible to run for president.

I mean, I have to quote good ole Bushy here: fool me once, can't be fooled again? Or however he fumbled that line.

technically, he realized mid quote that his political opponents would clip him saying "shame on me" for attack ads and changed course.

But yeah, I personally fell (for almost 2 years) for Trump meme and hoped something gonna happen, that the ship will be steered. It was hard to admit I was 100% duped, but I came to my senses around 2018.

Is this Musk guy gonna be the same? Final cope hope for da whitey? We can't be that naive...r-right?

Also, topic related question and 100% serious one - did the "muh free speech muh reeeeee speech" rules changed on that shit site? Can I reply "fuck you perv" to a tranny and not get swatted by Blackwater?

 

[FluffyJackal]

View attachment 3217790

How long could you feed ham+cheese sandwiches to the poorest 1/10 of the world population with 43 bill.?

 

[LurkTrawl]

'Hurting people's feelings on Twitter is like disrupting a play by screaming in the middle.'

If people screamed in the middle of most dour modern plays, it would actually improve the experience. However, the issue there is more of a practical matter to allow the play to continue, while removing 'offensive' speech or 'misinformation' is not, because social media is mostly just a bunch of people talking. It's like saying that votes in elections should be discounted when they are for the 'wrong,' 'offensive' candidate, because that would disrupt some imaginary play in which your candidate wins.

Literally makes one wonder where these people live, since they never encounter anyone that lies, hurts their feelings, or makes them upset at all. Since that would probably disrupt the world and prevent it from existing, according to them.

Public discourse isn't a play. There's no script, nor tandem, nor really any restrictions on its ebb and flow. The fact that a person would refer to the public discourse as a play shows that they think it should be scripted, and ultimately controlled.

 

[AnOminous]

How long could you feed ham+cheese sandwiches to the poorest 1/10 of the world population with 43 bill.?

That doesn't sound anywhere near as fun as triggering every Twitter tranny janny alive.

 

[Tactical Wizard]

How long could you feed ham+cheese sandwiches to the poorest 1/10 of the world population with 43 bill.?

If you go super cheap on components?

About a week.

 

[Josterman]

 

[WelfareNiggerQueen]

View attachment 3237549

 

[Quiet Guy]

Musk is not your friend, he's not your ally, and he's not at all sympathetic to whatever cause you ascribe to.

Didn't Musk say that he has Asperger's syndrome on SNL? Wouldn't that make this a victory for all of Kiwi Farms, since he's one of our own?

 

[Exigent Circumcisions]

Been banned twice for calling Elon Musk a retard. It's really funny to me that his simps will act like he's this total free speech advocate but get mad when you criticize him and censor you.

If you think that's bad, try fucking with Null for a couple of hours.

 

[El Goblina]

If you think that's bad, try fucking with Null for a couple of hours.

While I get your point, I want to formally object to suggesting that people fuck with Null.

 

[Exigent Circumcisions]

While I get your point, I want to formally object to suggesting that people fuck with Null.

It's never not funny.

 

[Charlie Delicious]

Let people create and share their block lists
Re emphasize that mute does exist
You don't have to leave Twitter to escape the hellish freezepeachzone that Elon will apparently create

If you don't like being called out for being a nasty tranny then use the appropriate tools within the system.

Instead it's "omg they're gunna spam 'nigrajewfag' all over! Who will save us?! "

 

[Basement Dwelling Dork]

View attachment 3237549

lol they're not even hiding it anymore. The fact that Trump is still the blame for all this just proves there isn't a proper arguement over free speech shows how dedicated they are to that shitty blue bird app.