Elon Musk. Twitter. Babylon Bee.

[Josh]

The hope can be conservatives do not fall into the temptation of overly organized political tactics.
The hope for a lingering UNorganized diverse population is what makes the U.S. unique and desirable.
Otherwise, it’s just another intolerant self-serving cabal, like any number of others.

Of course conservatives use overly organized political tactics! The fact the Supreme Court will be dominated by conservatives for the next generation is because of political manipulation that prevented Obama from nominating Merrick Garland and an inconsistent approach that gave Trump three nominations. The fact that the conservative Federalist Society is a feeder system for federal judges is a political tactic. The overturn of Roe V. Wade is the result of 50 years of political organizing.

Go easy on the conspiracy theory websites, Szdfan.

We have been able to see what an unfair and biased attorney general Garland is, who also refuses to prosecute serious gun crimes. Our country would be in be in very serious trouble with him as attorney general. The people spoke and elected a Republican Senate which was entirely reasonable not to nominate him.

Conservatives are extremely politically organized and they play dirty all the time.

I’m not sure how that’s “dirty”. Liberals do the exact same thing and in fact they decided to politicise the judiciary first.

I also don’t see how it’s dirty to overturn Roe vs Wade. There is no higher political priority than preventing the murder of innocent babies.

[temporal1]

As-if .. having the NYT and msm in pockets of the DNC for decades is not “dirty?” ..
It’s just so normalized, they feel 100% entitled. Shocked to be questioned! You cannot make this up.

At least Elon is playing a part.

“Twitter legacy blue ticks remain despite Elon Musk’s subscription threat”
Removal of verification badges reportedly could take a long time as it may involve many manual elements
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... ion-threat

.. As April fool’s day came and passed, the blue ticks remained, despite much anticipation.
As of Sunday, Musk appears to have only removed one blue tick: that for The New York Times.

This appears to have been done in retaliation for the news outlet announcing it would not pay for the service,
according to a reply from Musk. ..

[Robert]

This is quite funny. Typical lying media.



Elon for the win!!

[temporal1]

^^Found in Comments elsewhere:

breadmoth WROTE:

Things Elon Musk owns: Twitter, Tesla , SpaceX and now BBC

[RZehr]

Remember when Elon tried to get out of buying Twitter? Here Elon Musk was asked why he changed his mind. He says that it was because he wanted to buy it at a lower price. He compares the deal to a warehouse full of goods that you are buying, and you are told that 5% or less of the goods are broken. If you find out that more are broken, you still want to buy the warehouse, but you want to pay a lower price. So according to him, he didn’t really completely loose interest in buying it, he just wanted to pay less. He did not want to pay his full price offer.
Then he goes on to say that the reason he ended up paying the full price, was because he was advised, and believed, that he was going ultimately going to be forced to buy it.
He said that the executive compensation was tied to user growth, and so they were not incentivized to police the bots at all.

[Ken]

Remember when Elon tried to get out of buying Twitter? Here Elon Musk was asked why he changed his mind. He says that it was because he wanted to buy it at a lower price. He compares the deal to a warehouse full of goods that you are buying, and you are told that 5% or less of the goods are broken. If you find out that more are broken, you still want to buy the warehouse, but you want to pay a lower price. So according to him, he didn’t really completely loose interest in buying it, he just wanted to pay less. He did not want to pay his full price offer.
Then he goes on to say that the reason he ended up paying the full price, was because he was advised, and believed, that he was going ultimately going to be forced to buy it.

No one FORCED him into signing a binding contract to buy Twitter at X-price. He did that of his own free will. If he didn't include any standard contingency clauses for inspection of the books or bots or whatever, that's his fault.

Essentially he forced himself to buy Twitter. No one else did.

[temporal1]

Remember when Elon tried to get out of buying Twitter? Here Elon Musk was asked why he changed his mind. He says that it was because he wanted to buy it at a lower price. He compares the deal to a warehouse full of goods that you are buying, and you are told that 5% or less of the goods are broken. If you find out that more are broken, you still want to buy the warehouse, but you want to pay a lower price. So according to him, he didn’t really completely loose interest in buying it, he just wanted to pay less. He did not want to pay his full price offer.
Then he goes on to say that the reason he ended up paying the full price, was because he was advised, and believed, that he was going ultimately going to be forced to buy it.
He said that the executive compensation was tied to user growth, and so they were not incentivized to police the bots at all.
https:

i haven’t yet listened in full.
only recently, re: Twitter, have i paid any attention to Elon Musk, whom i consider supremely eccentric and possibly brilliant.
i would not attempt to understand or second-guess him on any matter. not fully. i’d always leave a margin for “eccentric.”

having said that, what you’ve described is fairly common business practice/strategy.

example.
in real estate, buyers often make offers -contingent- on variables, like home inspections, also, having functioning mechanicals.
if something shows up broken or not functioning, there is opportunity to be released from the sale, or, negotiate (often, a lower purchase price). i’ve seen it happen. it’s happened to us in the past. in our case, nothing out of hand. for some, sales are lost.

i’m not surprised by any of the drama around the purchase. it happens. it’s business.

i was surprised there were no obvious contingencies written into the contract. but, it’s business.

[temporal1]

Elon Musk claims feds had ‘full access’ to private messages on Twitter
https://nypost.com/2023/04/17/elon-musk ... -messages/

[Ken]

in real estate, buyers often make offers -contingent- on variables, like home inspections, also, having functioning mechanicals.
if something shows up broken or not functioning, there is opportunity to be released from the sale, or, negotiate (often, a lower purchase price). i’ve seen it happen. it’s happened to us in the past. in our case, nothing out of hand. for some, sales are lost.

Yes, you normally do that in business deals too. Contingency clauses are pretty standard in both business deals and real estate.

But Elon Musk neglected to include contingency clauses in his purchase agreement with Twitter which means either: (1) he had bad lawyers, (2) he didn't listen to his lawyers, or (2) he thought he could just skate anyway and break contracts without consequences because he has gotten so used to getting his way.

[RZehr]

Remember when Elon tried to get out of buying Twitter? Here Elon Musk was asked why he changed his mind. He says that it was because he wanted to buy it at a lower price. He compares the deal to a warehouse full of goods that you are buying, and you are told that 5% or less of the goods are broken. If you find out that more are broken, you still want to buy the warehouse, but you want to pay a lower price. So according to him, he didn’t really completely loose interest in buying it, he just wanted to pay less. He did not want to pay his full price offer.
Then he goes on to say that the reason he ended up paying the full price, was because he was advised, and believed, that he was going ultimately going to be forced to buy it.

No one FORCED him into signing a binding contract to buy Twitter at X-price. He did that of his own free will. If he didn't include any standard contingency clauses for inspection of the books or bots or whatever, that's his fault.

Essentially he forced himself to buy Twitter. No one else did.

Are you simply repeating what I wrote here, or did you not read it, or what?

Then he goes on to say that the reason he ended up paying the full price, was because he was advised, and believed, that he was going ultimately going to be forced to buy it

He also says that if someone offers him $44 billion for Twitter right now, he would take it or consider it. He says he doesn't care about the money (which does seem at odds with what he said his motivation for wanting to renegotiate the price). He wants to see Twitter run by someone who cares about the truth.