Twitter is already a disaster if you don't pay attention to the accounts you follow. I don't see this changing much of anything in my twitter feed. If it does then I will cull the list of things I follow even further.
Especially when only certain groups are being targeted. And I don't mean Dems or Pubs. I mean allowing known terrorists to post freely but banning far less dangerous individuals.twocoach wrote: ↑Tue Apr 26, 2022 10:30 amTwitter is already a disaster if you don't pay attention to the accounts you follow. I don't see this changing much of anything in my twitter feed. If it does then I will cull the list of things I follow even further.
In a broader context, has banning dipshits, scumbags and racists from twitter lessened the number of dipshits, scumbags and racists? No. Has it reduced the impact of those dipshits, scumbags and racists? No.
lulzBasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Apr 28, 2022 7:20 am Elon is very strange, but doesn't seem nearly as evil as some of the other rich people.
Solve? Or help fight?
But they didn'tousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:28 am there's that whole $6 billion dollar exchange between Musk and the UN too
Musk: describe a plan how 2% of my wealth could solve world hunger and I'll donate it
UN: here's the plan
Musk: OK but where's the money go? show your accounting
UN: shows accounting
Musk: spends $44 billion on twitter instead
The link that YOU posted referenced 5.7 billion dollars worth of Tesla stock that he donated to an unspecified charity last year.ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 12:30 pm it'd be cool if Elon was more generous up front either way. Proactively approach the UN (or just use the vast resources at a billionaire's disposal to take the initiative yerself) and say, "here's a good faith donation to help fight world hunger."
but instead, we get antagonistic tweets.
AKA So the public could sit on their ass not doing volunteer work or donating money and just bitch about how they don't think the massive donation was enough/to the right organization, etc...
