Buzzfeed says Twitter's problem is too many fucking white males. - Yes they are completely serious.

They were also limited by a workforce that multiple former employees say fundamentally didn’t understand what abuse looks and feels like. “The decision-makers were not people who got abuse and didn’t understand that it’s not about content, it’s about context,” Miley said. “If Twitter had people in the room who’d been abused on the internet — meaning not just straight, white males — when they were creating the company, I can assure you the service would be different.” A 2015 Women, Action, and the Media study revealed that, as of 2014, Twitter’s leadership was 79% male and 72% white.

One month later, Anita Sarkeesian, a feminist writer and video game critic, took to her Tumblr page and posted 157 of examples of misogyny, gendered insults, victim blaming, incitement to suicide, and rape and death threats she’d received in a recent six-day stretch on Twitter. Despite the overtures from Twitter, the trolls were winning.

Literally rape!

https://www.buzzfeed.com/charliewar...r-failure-to-s?utm_term=.jww8J2zw7#.jy5kVyaox

 

[Rokko]

Lets make a twitter for non-whites only. Like back in the times, when blacks had their own sinks

(irony if you dont get it)

 

[polonium]

You can be a business and say or do practically anything and it will not affect the sock price;

Eh, I have to disagree with this. I sort of get where (I think) you're coming from, the kind of people worried or offended by twitter pissing off a FUCKING BUNCH OF WHITE MALES aren't going to be investing in Twitter stock anyway (and people who agree with it are socialist failures with no money to invest lol)

If a business says or does something that looks like it might affect profits then the stock will start to slide, or even fully tank. But you're right that Twitter's problem is not their politics it's their woeful lack of any way to actually make money.

 

[NQ 952]

Eh, I have to disagree with this. I sort of get where (I think) you're coming from, the kind of people worried or offended by twitter pissing off a FUCKING BUNCH OF WHITE MALES aren't going to be investing in Twitter stock anyway (and people who agree with it are socialist failures with no money to invest lol)

If a business says or does something that looks like it might affect profits then the stock will start to slide, or even fully tank. But you're right that Twitter's problem is not their politics it's their woeful lack of any way to actually make money.

I could rephrase what I said. I don't mean to say that Deloitte, an investment firm, could come out and start a genocide and get away with it. I mean a company like BP would be hard pressed to give a shit about their stock price if they had a huge oil spill that directly impacted a local ecology. Sure you'd have a dip from the retarded retail investors jumping ship but that gap would be filled by fund investors buying cheap.

Basically if you build a company around the regular murder of people and can directly correlate murdering people to increased profits, Wall St. won't give a fuck if you commit genocide on a regular basis. What they'll care about is how efficient you are at killing so that they know profits will continue to come in.

Twitter ALMOST gets this metric, but they were never able to correlate numbers with profits. They have huge numbers (install base, number of tweets, some other bullshit), but they cannot turn a fucking profit to save their lives which is why the stock is in the shitter. Facebook, on the other hand, was able to correlate their huge numbers with huge profits, thus a stock price over $100. Apple makes huge sales. Google ... well, Google owns the world.

 

[CatParty]

they're not wrong tho

 

[polonium]

I could rephrase what I said. I don't mean to say that Deloitte, an investment firm, could come out and start a genocide and get away with it. I mean a company like BP would be hard pressed to give a shit about their stock price if they had a huge oil spill that directly impacted a local ecology. Sure you'd have a dip from the exceptional retail investors jumping ship but that gap would be filled by fund investors buying cheap.

Basically if you build a company around the regular murder of people and can directly correlate murdering people to increased profits, Wall St. won't give a fuck if you commit genocide on a regular basis. What they'll care about is how efficient you are at killing so that they know profits will continue to come in.

Twitter ALMOST gets this metric, but they were never able to correlate numbers with profits. They have huge numbers (install base, number of tweets, some other bullshit), but they cannot turn a fucking profit to save their lives which is why the stock is in the shitter. Facebook, on the other hand, was able to correlate their huge numbers with huge profits, thus a stock price over $100. Apple makes huge sales. Google ... well, Google owns the world.

Gotcha, I agree with you. The only way someone like BP are going to see a real downturn in stock price is if their ability to actual make a profit look to be at risk, looking long term.