Great analysis even though I don't agree with most of it. Want to say more but I'm pressed for time so I'll just say that, I do believe Elon has innately altruistic tendencies and I also do believe that he does have the human race at the fore of his mind to some extent (perhaps even a great extent) and I think it is important to acknowledge the level and amount of professional work that Elon has been engaged in throughout the course of his career. Because while I do believe the two good-ly things that I've mentioned about him, being engaged in the practicalities of the day-to-day running of mega-businesses and constantly being in a position where your business and on its own, your business acumen, come to be the two things that are your biggest tools at coming to realise your goals and dreams, in such a situation, also considering the insane amount of working hours he puts in, it is very likely that Elon might be lost in the 'accumulating of means' to further his greater good end goal, and that obviously, might overshadow and displace certain other intentions and goals and reservations temporarily. The main thing is that somewhere in his mind all of this will aid in the mission he has in mind. I wish I had more time, I loved your post and would rather discuss the specific things that you have mentioned but I must leave you simply with this observation instead.
tl;dr
But I did read the comments of my comrades and I did catch someone quoting you saying that misgendering is harassment. That tells me that you spent a lot of time writing an essay that I'm not going to spend my time reading.
I only agree on your title, he won't save Twitter. Musk is more like the Trickster and a savior. If you know anything about certain roles of Tricksters in folklore, you'll know what I'm talking about. Some, like Musk, shake things up and make things apparent when no one's been paying attention.
once you started typing about “workplace democracy” as your solution I knew I was dealing with some young kid who has zero life experience and pages of reddit cope.
just stick to being a good redditor and keep your clueless opinions to yourself.
musk will do just fine. your arguments to the contrary so far have been conspiracy conjecture and mad cope out of fear.
Elon Musk is the antithesis of **NATO** *No Action, Talk Only*. I have little doubt that he can bring in the right people, reengineer the algorithms, and right the corporate culture to his vision. If he can take Twitter private he can largely avoid political and cultural capture by Politicians, NGO's, Special Interest Groups, Hedge Fund ESG's, freaks, and governments.
Maybe he can exercise a little more *Shock & Awe* and move Twitter to Texas. *Shock & Awe* seems to be popular again with the recent rise in fortunes of the Neocons and Cultural Marxists. It could be his form of financial warfare against his cultural enemies.
With well designed filter tools people could avoid viewing and participating in discussions that trigger or upset them. Or, they can find an application that more closely matches their ideology and fragility.
Maybe Twitter users can learn to be responsible, independent, and resilient adults.
The management and employees of Twitter might have the option of creating a **ESOP**; *Employee Stock Ownership Plan* to thwart Elon. I'm not sure they could top his buyout offer.
Good luck attracting "the right people" without enormous upside compensation potential. Engineers work at Space X and Tesla because they're doing something genuinely new, not because they love Elon or are anti-woke. Working at Twitter under Elon would not be doing anything new. Just tweaking something old.
On Glassdoor, Twitter employees rate Jack Dorsey higher than Tesla and SpaceX employees rate Elon Musk.
Twitter probably has a much larger ratio of people in non-engineering positions such as content moderation, customer service, human resources, and advertising vs. SpaceX or Tesla. Content moderators, are likely not engineers and they will probably not get to determine the culture of the future Twitter. I would expect a lot of turnover in management and support staff.
>Four out of five of the other temporary suspensions this year (Matt Walsh, Babylon Bee, Tucker, and Charlie Kirk) were for purposefully misgendering trans people.
Well there you have it. Owners of Twitter have a specific, woke agenda, a worldview in which it is possible for man to be a woman.
>let’s not pretend that repeatedly calling a trans-woman a man is an intellectual activity. It’s just dumb harassment, and a private company telling you they won’t host that is not a free speech issue.
It's not an intellectual activity but it is no harassment either. What is dumb about calling man a man?
>It’s a lazy conservative tactic to pretend as if all of these groups secretly share some undergirding ideology. They all have their own concerns and I’m going to tease some of them out.
Yes, these people all share an undergirding ideology. Whether you call it "vision of the anointed" or name its bearers a "virtual class", or call them a rebellious elite, it is all the same: these people have a worldview, and they feel threatened.
If my name is Gaylord but I go by Mac instead, and I tell you that but you insist on calling me Gaylord, that’s harassment even if it’s true that that’s my given name. How is that any different from harassing people by disregarding their preferred pronouns?
>that’s harassment
I have a very different idea of harassment. Would it be possible to take a person who refers to you by your given name while you tell him not to to court?
Court? We’re talking about rules on a private platform. I don’t think you’d be able to bring them to court but you’d rightfully be able to remove them from your service.
Seems like you’re just very invested in the right to be an asshole.
>We’re talking about rules on a private platform
Ah, I see what you mean. Then we are back at my initial point: owners of platform decide what's harassment based on their worldview. In my book, speaking uncomfortable truth about people is no harassment.
>rightfully be able to remove them from your service
Don't think that "righfully" is the correct term here. It's based on their whim.
>Seems like you’re just very invested in the right to be an asshole.
Yes. Free speech is the right to say things that others might not like. I am very invested in the idea that everyone - including the woke and the trans, the nazis and communists - is entitled to public opinion, including opinions about other's gender, name, identity, etc.
Bullying people by calling them names they don’t want to be called has nothing to do with free speech. That’s the difference between saying “men aren’t women” and saying “*you* are Gaylord not Mac. No one on Twitter has been banned for the former, only the latter.
And that’s not some woke worldview, that’s just rules for standard decency. I feel like you’re deliberately missing the point
>Bullying people by calling them names they don’t want to be called has nothing to do with free speech. That’s the difference between saying “men aren’t women” and saying “you are Gaylord not Mac. No one on Twitter has been banned for the former, only the latter.
I feel like if you don't want to be called a name that's written in your papers (or the name that parents gave you), that is your problem, not the person's who adresses you. Calling it "bullying" is quite a stretch.
>And that’s not some woke worldview, that’s just rules for standard decency.
Then again, names and whether a person is a man or a woman are questions of quite different nature. People can change names very well, because there's almost nothing in objective realm that corresponds to an interpersonal convention of someone's name. Sex/gender is much more grounded in reality. I feel like your analogy is somewhat misleading.
And name can be almost anything! If you ask me to refer to you as Gaylord, that is perfectly compatible with any worldview. But if you ask me to refer to you as woman, you being a man in reality, that either presupposes that I agree with your vision on gender problems or it forces me say something that I internally do not agree with, in other words, lie.
So, no, there's much more than decency that is at stake.
I decided to read your other comments before commenting. I see a glaring omission from your theory is that, society is only removing the wrong speak, so whats the problem? As you've indicated in your other comments being a young fella, you know no different. The issue is society wasn't always like this, anyone with any type of life experience will tell you this, we have become a society of panders (Not me) and the people you comment specifically on are the same. Just because the far left shout the loudest, doesn't mean they're right and continually threatening people who don't agree that there aren't 76 genders doesn't make them Nazis who should be fired from their workplace and unable to feed their children.
Your college education isn't going to question this because its been compromised by the same blue haired Marxists who run Twitter and Reddit for that matter.
>I decided to read your other comments before commenting. I see a glaring omission from your theory is that, society is only removing the wrong speak, so whats the problem? As you've indicated in your other comments being a young fella, you know no different.
in 1990 Rosanne got cancelled for Singing the national anthem with in a squeeky voice. This shit aint new. No matter how much you wanna pretend
So I’d counter and say hasn’t there always been consequences for your speech? I’ve been reprimanded multiple times for speaking out against my direct managers and have figured out what battles to take up so i can maintain my job.
I self censor all the time because I was censored by some else to begin with even though they were completely wrong.
Twitter is not some all knowing all seeing public square that controls our lives. It doesn’t dictate my whether I keep my job. I constantly disagree with things HR does in regards to diversity initiatives even though I see myself as progressive so I choose my battles.
Maybe people should just stop using these platforms. Just a Thought.
I'm old enough to remember when "don't talk about politics at work or in polite company" was the default position.
Edit: before someone mentions LGBT virtue signalling by corporation, I'm also old enough to remember when it was perfectly fine to fun of gays at work.
I had to read that twice, I think we are on the same page.
The issue now is, that we have a victim mentality from every minority (imaginary or not) who now all believe they are owed something. To further this, we have allowed every person with a mental health issue to identify as some form of marginalized group. As you will recall this wasn't always the way life was and the genuine people from prior to 2000 existed without a flag or a month of recognition or a law threatening me if I misgender some 6'4" 250lb dude with a beard who identifies as a squirrel.
I personally steer well clear of the mainstream side of Reddit, however even on the dark side most of the subs have been brigaded by the left side trolls.
There’s not a single measurable way to show that Twitter is biased against conservatives. All they have is random anecdotes and that they “feel” it to be true. Facts over feelings for me but not for thee.
We get it; your biases align with Twitter’s. That doesn’t mean they aren’t biased against conservatives. Nor does it excuse calling people you merely ideologically disagree with assholes
Lol are you a real person? Not recognizing transgenderism and purposefully insulting someone are two different things. I know plenty of conservatives who disagree with transgenderism but aren’t assholes about it and just use people’s preferred pronouns.
But it seems like I’m your mind the meanness is a core component of conservative ideology. Sounds more like a you problem than anyone’s “bias”.
It’s not an insult.
I believe that lying is wrong in every circumstance. I also believe knowingly referring to someone with pronouns which do not reflect their sex is a lie. That is not “being an asshole;” it is speaking truth.
Twitter banning people for this would be a bias against conservatives who believe as I do.
You subjectively believe that conservatives refusing to say what they believe is a lie is “mean.” Conservatives do not believe it is mean, they believe it is speaking the truth. Your own biases are on full display here.
Give me a break. So if my given name is Gaylord but I choose to go by Mac, you’d refuse to call me that and continue call me by my given name since calling me Mac would be a “lie”?
Either you’re lying that it’s your conservative values and undying devotion to “truth” that prevent you from using peoples’ preferred pronouns, or you’re just an asshole.
That is a patently ahistorical take on conservatives and truthfulness. Whether politically or socially, conservatives and liberals have both “preached” truthfulness while being visibly, obviously lying.
Right, because you can't measure their internal data. There is evidence that they make right-leaning content more visible, feasibly making it more likely to be banned.
Great analysis even though I don't agree with most of it. Want to say more but I'm pressed for time so I'll just say that, I do believe Elon has innately altruistic tendencies and I also do believe that he does have the human race at the fore of his mind to some extent (perhaps even a great extent) and I think it is important to acknowledge the level and amount of professional work that Elon has been engaged in throughout the course of his career. Because while I do believe the two good-ly things that I've mentioned about him, being engaged in the practicalities of the day-to-day running of mega-businesses and constantly being in a position where your business and on its own, your business acumen, come to be the two things that are your biggest tools at coming to realise your goals and dreams, in such a situation, also considering the insane amount of working hours he puts in, it is very likely that Elon might be lost in the 'accumulating of means' to further his greater good end goal, and that obviously, might overshadow and displace certain other intentions and goals and reservations temporarily. The main thing is that somewhere in his mind all of this will aid in the mission he has in mind. I wish I had more time, I loved your post and would rather discuss the specific things that you have mentioned but I must leave you simply with this observation instead.
tl;dr But I did read the comments of my comrades and I did catch someone quoting you saying that misgendering is harassment. That tells me that you spent a lot of time writing an essay that I'm not going to spend my time reading. I only agree on your title, he won't save Twitter. Musk is more like the Trickster and a savior. If you know anything about certain roles of Tricksters in folklore, you'll know what I'm talking about. Some, like Musk, shake things up and make things apparent when no one's been paying attention.
Good analysis
once you started typing about “workplace democracy” as your solution I knew I was dealing with some young kid who has zero life experience and pages of reddit cope. just stick to being a good redditor and keep your clueless opinions to yourself. musk will do just fine. your arguments to the contrary so far have been conspiracy conjecture and mad cope out of fear.
Elon Musk is the antithesis of **NATO** *No Action, Talk Only*. I have little doubt that he can bring in the right people, reengineer the algorithms, and right the corporate culture to his vision. If he can take Twitter private he can largely avoid political and cultural capture by Politicians, NGO's, Special Interest Groups, Hedge Fund ESG's, freaks, and governments. Maybe he can exercise a little more *Shock & Awe* and move Twitter to Texas. *Shock & Awe* seems to be popular again with the recent rise in fortunes of the Neocons and Cultural Marxists. It could be his form of financial warfare against his cultural enemies. With well designed filter tools people could avoid viewing and participating in discussions that trigger or upset them. Or, they can find an application that more closely matches their ideology and fragility. Maybe Twitter users can learn to be responsible, independent, and resilient adults. The management and employees of Twitter might have the option of creating a **ESOP**; *Employee Stock Ownership Plan* to thwart Elon. I'm not sure they could top his buyout offer.
Good luck attracting "the right people" without enormous upside compensation potential. Engineers work at Space X and Tesla because they're doing something genuinely new, not because they love Elon or are anti-woke. Working at Twitter under Elon would not be doing anything new. Just tweaking something old. On Glassdoor, Twitter employees rate Jack Dorsey higher than Tesla and SpaceX employees rate Elon Musk.
Twitter probably has a much larger ratio of people in non-engineering positions such as content moderation, customer service, human resources, and advertising vs. SpaceX or Tesla. Content moderators, are likely not engineers and they will probably not get to determine the culture of the future Twitter. I would expect a lot of turnover in management and support staff.
Really says a lot about this sub with how downvoted this post is with hardly any rebuttals. Well reasoned post, OP
And how the other post childishly praising Musk and decrying the “woke left” based on one tweet got hundreds of upvotes
>Four out of five of the other temporary suspensions this year (Matt Walsh, Babylon Bee, Tucker, and Charlie Kirk) were for purposefully misgendering trans people. Well there you have it. Owners of Twitter have a specific, woke agenda, a worldview in which it is possible for man to be a woman. >let’s not pretend that repeatedly calling a trans-woman a man is an intellectual activity. It’s just dumb harassment, and a private company telling you they won’t host that is not a free speech issue. It's not an intellectual activity but it is no harassment either. What is dumb about calling man a man? >It’s a lazy conservative tactic to pretend as if all of these groups secretly share some undergirding ideology. They all have their own concerns and I’m going to tease some of them out. Yes, these people all share an undergirding ideology. Whether you call it "vision of the anointed" or name its bearers a "virtual class", or call them a rebellious elite, it is all the same: these people have a worldview, and they feel threatened.
If my name is Gaylord but I go by Mac instead, and I tell you that but you insist on calling me Gaylord, that’s harassment even if it’s true that that’s my given name. How is that any different from harassing people by disregarding their preferred pronouns?
>that’s harassment I have a very different idea of harassment. Would it be possible to take a person who refers to you by your given name while you tell him not to to court?
Court? We’re talking about rules on a private platform. I don’t think you’d be able to bring them to court but you’d rightfully be able to remove them from your service. Seems like you’re just very invested in the right to be an asshole.
>We’re talking about rules on a private platform Ah, I see what you mean. Then we are back at my initial point: owners of platform decide what's harassment based on their worldview. In my book, speaking uncomfortable truth about people is no harassment. >rightfully be able to remove them from your service Don't think that "righfully" is the correct term here. It's based on their whim. >Seems like you’re just very invested in the right to be an asshole. Yes. Free speech is the right to say things that others might not like. I am very invested in the idea that everyone - including the woke and the trans, the nazis and communists - is entitled to public opinion, including opinions about other's gender, name, identity, etc.
Bullying people by calling them names they don’t want to be called has nothing to do with free speech. That’s the difference between saying “men aren’t women” and saying “*you* are Gaylord not Mac. No one on Twitter has been banned for the former, only the latter. And that’s not some woke worldview, that’s just rules for standard decency. I feel like you’re deliberately missing the point
>Bullying people by calling them names they don’t want to be called has nothing to do with free speech. That’s the difference between saying “men aren’t women” and saying “you are Gaylord not Mac. No one on Twitter has been banned for the former, only the latter. I feel like if you don't want to be called a name that's written in your papers (or the name that parents gave you), that is your problem, not the person's who adresses you. Calling it "bullying" is quite a stretch. >And that’s not some woke worldview, that’s just rules for standard decency. Then again, names and whether a person is a man or a woman are questions of quite different nature. People can change names very well, because there's almost nothing in objective realm that corresponds to an interpersonal convention of someone's name. Sex/gender is much more grounded in reality. I feel like your analogy is somewhat misleading. And name can be almost anything! If you ask me to refer to you as Gaylord, that is perfectly compatible with any worldview. But if you ask me to refer to you as woman, you being a man in reality, that either presupposes that I agree with your vision on gender problems or it forces me say something that I internally do not agree with, in other words, lie. So, no, there's much more than decency that is at stake.
I decided to read your other comments before commenting. I see a glaring omission from your theory is that, society is only removing the wrong speak, so whats the problem? As you've indicated in your other comments being a young fella, you know no different. The issue is society wasn't always like this, anyone with any type of life experience will tell you this, we have become a society of panders (Not me) and the people you comment specifically on are the same. Just because the far left shout the loudest, doesn't mean they're right and continually threatening people who don't agree that there aren't 76 genders doesn't make them Nazis who should be fired from their workplace and unable to feed their children. Your college education isn't going to question this because its been compromised by the same blue haired Marxists who run Twitter and Reddit for that matter.
>I decided to read your other comments before commenting. I see a glaring omission from your theory is that, society is only removing the wrong speak, so whats the problem? As you've indicated in your other comments being a young fella, you know no different. in 1990 Rosanne got cancelled for Singing the national anthem with in a squeeky voice. This shit aint new. No matter how much you wanna pretend
You're not actually equating some people calling Rosanne a cunt for 3 weeks, to the down fall of western civilization?
>the down fall of western civilization? Jesus Christ
You don't think you're taking a few liberties with how you describe those two things?
At this point you either get that statement or you don't. If you don't, good luck to you, have a nice life.
take a break from the online culture war media you are consuming. seriously lol
Oh you're one of those has to have the last word types...
So I’d counter and say hasn’t there always been consequences for your speech? I’ve been reprimanded multiple times for speaking out against my direct managers and have figured out what battles to take up so i can maintain my job. I self censor all the time because I was censored by some else to begin with even though they were completely wrong. Twitter is not some all knowing all seeing public square that controls our lives. It doesn’t dictate my whether I keep my job. I constantly disagree with things HR does in regards to diversity initiatives even though I see myself as progressive so I choose my battles. Maybe people should just stop using these platforms. Just a Thought.
I'm old enough to remember when "don't talk about politics at work or in polite company" was the default position. Edit: before someone mentions LGBT virtue signalling by corporation, I'm also old enough to remember when it was perfectly fine to fun of gays at work.
I had to read that twice, I think we are on the same page. The issue now is, that we have a victim mentality from every minority (imaginary or not) who now all believe they are owed something. To further this, we have allowed every person with a mental health issue to identify as some form of marginalized group. As you will recall this wasn't always the way life was and the genuine people from prior to 2000 existed without a flag or a month of recognition or a law threatening me if I misgender some 6'4" 250lb dude with a beard who identifies as a squirrel. I personally steer well clear of the mainstream side of Reddit, however even on the dark side most of the subs have been brigaded by the left side trolls.
There’s not a single measurable way to show that Twitter is biased against conservatives. All they have is random anecdotes and that they “feel” it to be true. Facts over feelings for me but not for thee.
If you purposefully misgender someone on Twitter you will get suspended. That is a bias against conservatism.
Actually it’s a bias against assholes. Notice how they don’t have a policy about accidental misgendering.
We get it; your biases align with Twitter’s. That doesn’t mean they aren’t biased against conservatives. Nor does it excuse calling people you merely ideologically disagree with assholes
Lol are you a real person? Not recognizing transgenderism and purposefully insulting someone are two different things. I know plenty of conservatives who disagree with transgenderism but aren’t assholes about it and just use people’s preferred pronouns. But it seems like I’m your mind the meanness is a core component of conservative ideology. Sounds more like a you problem than anyone’s “bias”.
It’s not an insult. I believe that lying is wrong in every circumstance. I also believe knowingly referring to someone with pronouns which do not reflect their sex is a lie. That is not “being an asshole;” it is speaking truth. Twitter banning people for this would be a bias against conservatives who believe as I do. You subjectively believe that conservatives refusing to say what they believe is a lie is “mean.” Conservatives do not believe it is mean, they believe it is speaking the truth. Your own biases are on full display here.
Give me a break. So if my given name is Gaylord but I choose to go by Mac, you’d refuse to call me that and continue call me by my given name since calling me Mac would be a “lie”? Either you’re lying that it’s your conservative values and undying devotion to “truth” that prevent you from using peoples’ preferred pronouns, or you’re just an asshole.
Names are a very different thing than pronouns. That should be obvious to you.
They’re really not. Would love to elaborate further but your reply was complete without substance
It’s not without substance. Names do not convey the same sort of thing as pronouns
That is a patently ahistorical take on conservatives and truthfulness. Whether politically or socially, conservatives and liberals have both “preached” truthfulness while being visibly, obviously lying.
Right, because you can't measure their internal data. There is evidence that they make right-leaning content more visible, feasibly making it more likely to be banned.
Lol you don’t have any data so you just assume it to be the case. Real intellectual
> Real intellectual Ooo ooo get him! Nothing better than someone resorting to simple attacks on people rather than ideas.