Elon is honeydicking Twitter....

[anonemouse]

the way he treated bitcoin and Dogecoin…. That’s mostly what he cares about.

100% agreed. I think this is (legal) stock manipulation.

There's enough Elon fanboys out there that he could probably make money by buying a stock, Tweeting about it, fanboys buy in as well driving the price up, and then he quietly sells for a profit and never mentions it again.

 

[Mr.Know-It-All]

Yeah he's just playing the stock market.

 

[poker]

I find it amusing that Elon blocked Robert Reich…. But here are Roberts thoughts.


In case you missed it, Elon Musk made an offer to buy Twitter outright at $54.20 a share, valuing the social media company at about $43 billion. $54.20 a share is nearly 40 percent higher than Twitter’s stock price in January, when Musk first began buying up shares.

So, to recap: Musk made about $156 million by violating securities law when he filed a disclosure form late. He was then rewarded with a seat on Twitter’s board as its largest shareholder, with a stake of 9.2 percent. The deal to become a board member meant Musk would have to uphold fiduciary responsibility to the company (which entails acting in the best interests of the company and its shareholders, i.e. not publicly criticizing it on a whim) and wouldn’t be allowed to buy more than 14.9 percent of Twitter’s stock. Musk then declined the offer to become a board member, and now here we are: the world’s richest man wants to fully take over a social media company used by millions.

Is anyone else concerned that the second-richest man in the world owns the Washington Post, and the richest man wants to own Twitter? Apparently, it’s not enough for oligarchs to wield the power in both our economy and our democracy. Now they want to pull the strings in the media and on the Internet, too. Let’s be clear: billionaires controlling speech and expression sets us on a dangerous path.

What do you think?

 

[blueray]

How has this weird guy not been accused of stock manipulation?

By who? The SEC? There is not a more inept government organization than the SEC.

 

[Valcazar]

I get the feeling that the only thing that ever motivates him is increasing his personal financial wealth.

It's not the *only* thing, but it is a huge part of it, obviously.

 

[Valcazar]

How has this weird guy not been accused of stock manipulation?

He has.
He's constantly in trouble with the SEC.

 

[Valcazar]

He likes to tweet things that might be considered PR for Tesla, perhaps controversial comments, whatever is on his mind. And he doesn't like censorship when it affects him. So he buys a bunch of shares, threatens to get on the board and influence policy. Declines a board seat and now says maybe he'll buy all the shares. An owner or chairman would be subject to a lot of rules that would prevent his usual behaviour. So perhaps the stock price rises now that he suggests a takeover? Who really knows his motives here, but it certainly sounds like some kind of fuckery to me.

The thing is, when you are as rich as he is, you can just do whatever fuckery you like.
Getting twitter or not getting twitter doesn't really matter to him. It's chump change.
He can buy it or walk away or fuck with it - whatever.
Being on the board had rules, and he didn't like that.

He will get a lot of publicity for this either way.
He reminds everyone he is important.
He gets to pretend he believes in free speech.
And no matter what happens he gets to say he won.

That's the advantage of being as rich as he is.

 

[Valcazar]

If the answer to both of these questions is no, then your freedom of speech has been fully protected.

No.

Violating free speech is when you say something I agree with and someone else make you feel bad about it.
People on Twitter who agree with Elon sometimes don't get to say anything they want without consequences.
Therefore Twitter is against free speech.

 

[Valcazar]

Is anyone else concerned that the second-richest man in the world owns the Washington Post, and the richest man wants to own Twitter? Apparently, it’s not enough for oligarchs to wield the power in both our economy and our democracy. Now they want to pull the strings in the media and on the Internet, too. Let’s be clear: billionaires controlling speech and expression sets us on a dangerous path.

Yes. It's a huge fucking problem.

 

[JeanGary Diablo]

No.

Violating free speech is when you say something I agree with and someone else make you feel bad about it.
People on Twitter who agree with Elon sometimes don't get to say anything they want without consequences.
Therefore Twitter is against free speech.

Incorrect. Laws protecting our freedom of speech completely centre on preventing government or police overreach -- that's it, nothing more, nothing less.

As a citizen, I am allowed to use my free speech to scream over top of someone whose views I do not agree with to the point they get so frustrated they pack up and leave. People may not like that, it may be rude and inconsiderate, but it's not violating anyone's rights. Only the government and police can violate someone's rights in this regard.

RE Twitter -- it's a private company. As a private company, its platform is the property of its owners, and if they decide to not allow certain viewpoints, that's their right to do. Similarly, if someone comes into my home and says something I find offensive, I am fully within my right to tell them to retract what they said or leave my property. I am not violating their right to free speech. They have a right to an opinion, but they do not have the right to espouse that opinion on my property if I don't want them to.

 

[Valcazar]

Incorrect. Laws protecting our freedom of speech completely centre on preventing government or police overreach -- that's it, nothing more, nothing less.

Clearly I need to make the sarcasm more obvious.

 

[poker]

Clearly I need to make the sarcasm more obvious.

If you did make it more obvious, would it still be free?

 

[poker]

 

[Jasmina]

Nah, hate speech is literally illegal here in Canada.

Section 319(2): Promoting hatred—makes it an offence to wilfully promote hatred against any identifiable group, by making statements (other than in private conversation). The Crown prosecutor can proceed either by indictment or by summary process. The maximum penalty is imprisonment of not more than two years.

** Not saying I agree or disagree but I am tired of the misinformation floating about, do your research before you opt to die on any hill

Incorrect. Laws protecting our freedom of speech completely centre on preventing government or police overreach -- that's it, nothing more, nothing less.

As a citizen, I am allowed to use my free speech to scream over top of someone whose views I do not agree with to the point they get so frustrated they pack up and leave. People may not like that, it may be rude and inconsiderate, but it's not violating anyone's rights. Only the government and police can violate someone's rights in this regard.

RE Twitter -- it's a private company. As a private company, its platform is the property of its owners, and if they decide to not allow certain viewpoints, that's their right to do. Similarly, if someone comes into my home and says something I find offensive, I am fully within my right to tell them to retract what they said or leave my property. I am not violating their right to free speech. They have a right to an opinion, but they do not have the right to espouse that opinion on my property if I don't want them to.

 

[poker]

View attachment 138293 View attachment 138292

Shouldn’t you be at book burning rally with your other conservative pastors?

 

[poker]

Oh, not sure if this is the right thread to post this in…. But my band will be playing Toronto in the near future. Hope to see you all at the show. We are…. The Honey Dickers

 

[poker]

Yeah he's just playing the stock market.

He is doing that too… but I tend to think he believes his press.

 

[Valcazar]

View attachment 138727

 

[Valcazar]

Oh, not sure if this is the right thread to post this in…. But my band will be playing Toronto in the near future. Hope to see you all at the show. We are…. The Honey Dickers

I would go see the Honey Dickers.
They can open for Rampaging Pussy.

 

[rhuarc29]

Interesting. It's a little funny that the people saying Twitter, as a private company, has the right to censor opinions on their platform they don't agree with, are the same people screaming in fear that Musk may buy Twitter and do the exact same thing. So what makes Musk more evil than the current board?

Regardless, I don't think Musk would actually censor opinions like that. His whole stance is that he doesn't like how Twitter is censoring certain opinions. Not talking hate speech, but things like the hypothesis that COVID sprang from the Wuhan lab and not from the live animal market.