Musk Proposes to Buy Twitter for Original Price of $54.20 a Share

Status
Not open for further replies.
Went and tested myself, you cant actually like or retweet some substack tweets, muh freeze peach in true form.
 
quovadis said:
Happy. No need to discuss further then. You stick with whataboutism, feelings and clearly a lack of understanding of the arguments made.
Click to expand...
Ah misrepresenting facts. Classy.
You made silly arguments about "curation" when there's no evidence of this. Matt specifically stating that both administration has used this proves this.
It's strange that you harp on about Trump's Whitehouse when the main story revolved around the suppression of the laptop story, which has a direct impact on their 2020 election.
One is greater than the other...

If I wanted to whatabout it's Medhi avoiding the question about MSNBC problem with the exact thing he is claiming Matt is doing. And also saying he didn't say anything about the Laptop story, which is kinda the point.
 
Kieppie said:
Ah misrepresenting facts. Classy.
You made silly arguments about "curation" when there's no evidence of this. Matt specifically stating that both administration has used this proves this.
It's strange that you harp on about Trump's Whitehouse when the main story revolved around the suppression of the laptop story, which has a direct impact on their 2020 election.
One is greater than the other...

If I wanted to whatabout it's Medhi avoiding the question about MSNBC problem with the exact thing he is claiming Matt is doing. And also saying he didn't say anything about the Laptop story, which is kinda the point.
Click to expand...
Ok Focus Kieppie. Did the Taibii Twitter files mention the Whitehouse takedown requests specifically the Teigen matter? Yes or No.
 
quovadis said:
Ok Focus Kieppie. Did the Taibii Twitter files mention the Whitehouse takedown requests specifically the Teigen matter? Yes or No.
Click to expand...
Did they mention all takedown requests in the twitter files? Absence of mentioning does not imply some conservative bias or plot, take off your tin-foil hat.

You've called the Twitter files a "nothing burger", yet you harp on about the nothing burger that is Teigen?
 
Kieppie said:
Did they mention all takedown requests in the twitter files? Absence of mentioning does not imply some conservative bias or plot, take off your tin-foil hat.

You've called the Twitter files a "nothing burger", yet you harp on about the nothing burger that is Teigen?
Click to expand...
Your constant deflection is getting tiresome now.

If the best example and most direct request from a branch of government demanding censor of a private citizen was excluded from the Twitter files it can only be because either he missed it or it wasn't provided.

Taibbi has stated he has no record of it or the robust discussion regarding it thus the latter must prevail. Therefore Taibbi's "unfettered access" of Twitter was curated and is thus valid criticism.

Yes the twitter files is a nothingburger but I didn't write an article purporting it to be mass government censorship - Taibbi did and that's why he's having a hard time defending his "journalism".

But you're welcome to expand on why the President of the United States of America's demand for censorship of a private citizens tweet criticising the president himself is a nothingburger and please stay within the context of government censorship of twitter.
 
quovadis said:
Your constant deflection is getting tiresome now.

If the best example and most direct request from a branch of government demanding censor of a private citizen was excluded from the Twitter files it can only be because either he missed it or it wasn't provided.
Click to expand...
The best example of? Did the Twitter files mention the removal of Alex Berenson?
He alleged interference by the Biden Administration, but ultimately won his lawsuit.
His legal discovery unearthed internal Twitter documents and Slack conversations showing Biden administration officials instructed the social media company to de-platform him.

quovadis said:
Taibbi has stated he has no record of it or the robust discussion regarding it thus the latter must prevail. Therefore Taibbi's "unfettered access" of Twitter was curated and is thus valid criticism.
Click to expand...
Logic fail. Or more likely that it's such a huge dump that it was missed, it's effectively just a "mean tweet".
It is also not important enough given what was at the heart of the investigation at the time.

quovadis said:
Yes the twitter files is a nothingburger but I didn't write an article purporting it to be mass government censorship - Taibbi did and that's why he's having a hard time defending his "journalism".

But you're welcome to expand on why the President of the United States of America's demand for censorship of a private citizens tweet criticising the president himself is a nothingburger and please stay within the context of government censorship of twitter.
Click to expand...
Compared to the Laptop suppression it is indeed a nothing burger. One had a direct impact on their election the other did not. It was also central to what kicked this whole thing off.
Don't start comparing molehills and mountains.

The TLDR is that you believe the absence of evidence to be evidence.
It's mind boggling that people believe Twitter 2.0 had some sort of hidden "pro Republican" bias and acted to protect their interest.
As I said before, they did state that both administrations engaged in this practise.
 
Kieppie said:
The best example of? Did the Twitter files mention the removal of Alex Berenson?
He alleged interference by the Biden Administration, but ultimately won his lawsuit.
His legal discovery unearthed internal Twitter documents and Slack conversations showing Biden administration officials instructed the social media company to de-platform him.
Click to expand...
Do you understand the difference between demanding something (or someone) is removed and asking Twitter to see if there is compliance with their own rules? The Biden Administration did not instruct. Words matter.
Kieppie said:
Logic fail. Or more likely that it's such a huge dump that it was missed, it's effectively just a "mean tweet".
It is also not important enough given what was at the heart of the investigation at the time.
Click to expand...
No logic failure. The dumps do not contain the demand or discussion about it. It's never been disputed. It's pointless arguing what was censored - censorship is censorship. You get that, right?
Kieppie said:
Compared to the Laptop suppression it is indeed a nothing burger. One had a direct impact on their election the other did not. It was also central to what kicked this whole thing off.
Don't start comparing molehills and mountains.

The TLDR is that you believe the absence of evidence to be evidence.
It's mind boggling that people believe Twitter 2.0 had some sort of hidden "pro Republican" bias and acted to protect their interest.
Click to expand...
So the DOJ under Trump's AG Barr was responsible for the laptop saga. The Biden admin's only record is around the naked photos of Hunter. As for absence of evidence is evidence - that's ridiculous. The evidence exists and is confirmed. The absence of disclosure is bad faith and shoddy journalism.

Kieppie said:
As I said before, they did state that both administrations engaged in this practise.
Click to expand...
Taibbi only reported on one administration and without any context.
 
quovadis said:
Do you understand the difference between demanding something (or someone) is removed and asking Twitter to see if there is compliance with their own rules? The Biden Administration did not instruct. Words matter.
Click to expand...
It actually boils down to the same thing. "Here are a list of things we "feel" violate your TOS, please have a look at them at your leisure. Thanks in advance!"

quovadis said:
No logic failure. The dumps do not contain the demand or discussion about it. It's never been disputed. It's pointless arguing what was censored - censorship is censorship. You get that, right?
Click to expand...
Really? I thought no one had unfettered access to the dumps besides those journalists?

quovadis said:
So the DOJ under Trump's AG Barr was responsible for the laptop saga. The Biden admin's only record is around the naked photos of Hunter.
Click to expand...
Barr being the AG is irrelevant.
His position does not make him aware of everything that is going on in the FBI. It's kinda the problem with those institutions.

He said in an interview that the suppression of the story, under the cover that it was Russian Disinformation was essentially to keep a cork in it until after the election and that probably affected the outcome.
Not exactly something you would say if it was under your orders.

quovadis said:
As for absence of evidence is evidence - that's ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Not reporting on something doesn't mean the information wasn't provided.

quovadis said:
The evidence exists and is confirmed. The absence of disclosure is bad faith and shoddy journalism.
Click to expand...
What evidence exists? That Trump requested the removal of a tweet?

And no it's not shoddy journalism. If they had to report on each and every single case it would take forever.
The releases were already too large in scope.

quovadis said:
Taibbi only reported on one administration and without any context.
Click to expand...
There was more than enough context.
At least you acknowledge why people turned against Matt and the others. They exposed the "wrong" team.
The same reason why people turned against Musk for wanting to purchase Twitter.
 
Kieppie said:
It actually boils down to the same thing. "Here are a list of things we "feel" violate your TOS, please have a look at them at your leisure. Thanks in advance!"
Click to expand...
Nope, not the same. Words have meaning and the majority of such requests were not complied with. That's materially inconsistent with the premise of the article.
Kieppie said:
Really? I thought no one had unfettered access to the dumps besides those journalists?
Click to expand...
Taibbi himself.
Kieppie said:
Barr being the AG is irrelevant.
His position does not make him aware of everything that is going on in the FBI. It's kinda the problem with those institutions.

He said in an interview that the suppression of the story, under the cover that it was Russian Disinformation was essentially to keep a cork in it until after the election and that probably affected the outcome.
Not exactly something you would say if it was under your orders.
Click to expand...
Relevant and you are once again purposefully ignoring the framing of the twitter files and the hearing itself.
Kieppie said:
Not reporting on something doesn't mean the information wasn't provided.
Click to expand...
Can you not think past your own bias? It was not reported on because it was never provided. Hence, the "curated".
Kieppie said:
What evidence exists? That Trump requested the removal of a tweet?

And no it's not shoddy journalism. If they had to report on each and every single case it would take forever.
The releases were already too large in scope.
Click to expand...
Republican's own congressional testimony under oath. Sure, use that as an excuse when its very existence would derail the framing or premise of Taibbi's article.
Kieppie said:
There was more than enough context.
At least you acknowledge why people turned against Matt and the others. They exposed the "wrong" team.
The same reason why people turned against Musk for wanting to purchase Twitter.
Click to expand...
The context mattered because they only requested removal of photos not anything to do with censorship.

It seems you are intentionally ignoring the premise of the article and what it relies on to establish it.
 
Imagine being such a moron that a request to take down for example a fake account or tweet of "POTUS-crypto" offering to double your money (obvious scam for the potato among us) is "governmental overreach" and making a complaint to Twitter's takedown page for what equates to revenge-porn is "censorship"
Like I'm having trouble processing that somebody that stupid could be allowed to own a car or a gun
 
Elontler damage control is...well... @Kieppie can you reframe this gobbledygook in "apologist" for us?
https://twitter.com/x/status/1644638493883211779

I mean:
FtNEwWXX0AEKFDk
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X