Support NeoGAF

[Nobody_Important]

Twitter vs Elon legal battle:

What makes this picture is the all white group in an obviously middle to middle-upper class setting (the fence) combined with the fat kid striking a battle pose in his Adidas sweat pants and the skinny kid wearing cowboy boots with a bowl cut while their 12yr old friends (all with smart phones) film them.


That might be the most American thing I have seen since the 4th of July.

 

[HoodWinked]

Do the big chiefs at Twitter really think they stand a chance of actually suing the worlds richest man? I mean, legal issues aside (I'm pretty sure anyone has a 'cooling off' period in which they can legally retract from a contractual agreement), they just don't have the financial man-power to take him down. They'll try, because it's Twitter, but his legal team will go in harder on them than Depp's did on Turd. I can't wait to see this all fall apart in front of Twitter's face.

I think because Delaware is a state that is hospitable to corporations a reason why most companies incorporate there. Delaware courts likely would lean in favor of corporations not to anger or disrupt their clientele. Also doesn't help that Musk has disparaged Biden multiple times who has a legacy there.

 

[Xhosa]

Thread derailed. How about spinning off the gender stuff to another thread? Some of us just want to see the drama

 

[funkygunther]

Thread derailed. How about spinning off the gender stuff to another thread? Some of us just want to see the drama

noted

 

[saturnalian]

noted

I swear to god Elon has the absolute worst PR guy in the world, or he is incompetent. Picking a pathetic social media fight with trump is so counter-intuitive, dude heard of "Ignore"?
Posting Simpsons GIFs to "own" trump, like really?

 

[OZ9000]

The only definition I have seen goes something like this. Woman is a person who identifies as a woman. The word woman shall not imply or suppose any particular physical or mental characteristics. Hence, quite literally, woman has been reduced to anyone who identifies with the said five letters. In a way, it is a flag you fly.

Being a woman has been reduced to what clothes you wear on any given day of the week. Also if we can't define a woman then what the fuck are women rights and why do we need them?

If gender is a social construct then why do transexuals wear make up, take hormones, and undertake sex reassignment surgery? Trying to defy biology is wraught with an extremely high complication rate and a variety of adverse effects.

I have no idea why we are entertaining mental illness.

 

[Punished Miku]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...taskbar&cvid=146affa9663d4bf0cbb3b250b5f7ed2c

"The opening salvo adds: “Having mounted a public spectacle to put Twitter in play, and having proposed and then signed a seller-friendly merger agreement, Musk apparently believes that he — unlike every other party subject to Delaware contract law — is free to change his mind, trash the company, disrupt its operations, destroy stockholder value and walk away.”

 

[pleaseinsertdisctwo]

If anything, it's conservatives that are way more in touch with reality, liberty and morality, which is a very funny thing to consider.

Lol. No.

 

[ManaByte]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...taskbar&cvid=146affa9663d4bf0cbb3b250b5f7ed2c

"The opening salvo adds: “Having mounted a public spectacle to put Twitter in play, and having proposed and then signed a seller-friendly merger agreement, Musk apparently believes that he — unlike every other party subject to Delaware contract law — is free to change his mind, trash the company, disrupt its operations, destroy stockholder value and walk away.”

 

[InfiniteCombo]

Lol. No.

Yes.

 

[ANDS]

Do the big chiefs at Twitter really think they stand a chance of actually suing the worlds richest man? I mean, legal issues aside (I'm pretty sure anyone has a 'cooling off' period in which they can legally retract from a contractual agreement), they just don't have the financial man-power to take him down. They'll try, because it's Twitter, but his legal team will go in harder on them than Depp's did on Turd. I can't wait to see this all fall apart in front of Twitter's face.

What does wealth have to do with contract law? You don't think TWITTER can afford as many highly skilled lawyer as Musk? They've hired one of the US's most competent law firms to handle their interests in this.

. . .just an odd statement; like Musk isn't Lex Luthor.

 

[pleaseinsertdisctwo]

Yes.

The religious side is far more in touch with reality than the (generally much more) secular side? Okay. That is hilarious

 

[poodaddy]

The religious side is far more in touch with reality than the (generally much more) secular side? Okay. That is hilarious

I think both sides are absolutely retarded full stop.

Be an independent, only drones and the weak minded toe party lines.

 

[adamsapple]

noted

let them fight.gif

 

[InfiniteCombo]

The religious side is far more in touch with reality than the (generally much more) secular side? Okay. That is hilarious

Not everyone on the right is a religious nut. And even for some who are... so what? I'm not religious myself but can see a lot of benefits to society from organized religion.

I consider myself socially liberal but the modern American left (especially the progressive wing) definitely seems to... have lost the plot.

So, Azurro is 100% correct.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

I think both sides are absolutely retarded full stop.

Be an independent, only drones and the weak minded toe party lines.

This guy knows what's up.

 

[pleaseinsertdisctwo]

I think both sides are absolutely retarded full stop.

Be an independent, only drones and the weak minded toe party lines.

This is just lazy. It’s possible to align much more towards one side’s supposed values; it doesn’t mean I mindlessly defend them.

Not everyone on the right is a religious nut. And even for some who are... so what? I'm not religious myself but can see a lot of benefits to society from organized religion.

I consider myself socially liberal but the modern American left (especially the progressive wing) definitely seems to... have lost the plot.

So, Azurro is 100% correct.

A vast majority of conservatives are religious to a fault. Not even considering trans-related stuff, their Platform straight up states that it wants to get rid of gay marriage and gay rights. And we just had the Abortion rights fiasco.

You consider yourself socially liberal and yet you’re brown-nosing that poster? Cringeworthy behavior.

And I can acknowledge that a lot of progressives act whack without brown-nosing conservatives. I’m sure you can too



Side note: I wonder if I’ll get banned for these posts even though I’m not the one that brought politics into this thread.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

This is just lazy. It’s possible to align much more towards one side’s supposed values; it doesn’t mean I mindlessly defend them.

A vast majority of conservatives are religious to a fault. Not even considering trans-related stuff, their Platform straight up states that it wants to get rid of gay marriage and gay rights. And we just had the Abortion rights fiasco.

You consider yourself socially liberal and yet you’re brown-nosing that poster? Are you kidding me?

If you keep your emotions in check and calm down for one damn second, you'll see that I'm not brown nosing anyone. But, I do agree with him much more than I do with you. Facts.

You're making lots of claims without backing them up, so to me it's all just your emotionally-driven, anecdotal observations about stuff. I can't take you seriously.

If you want to have a debate on the merits of the topics, without resorting to hyperbole and childish insults, I would be happy to interact with you. Otherwise, buzz off.

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

Do the big chiefs at Twitter really think they stand a chance of actually suing the worlds richest man? I mean, legal issues aside (I'm pretty sure anyone has a 'cooling off' period in which they can legally retract from a contractual agreement), they just don't have the financial man-power to take him down. They'll try, because it's Twitter, but his legal team will go in harder on them than Depp's did on Turd. I can't wait to see this all fall apart in front of Twitter's face.

No. Unless specifically mentioned in the contract, they typically don't. Hopefully you haven't signed any big contracts recently...

 

[pleaseinsertdisctwo]

This guy knows what's up.

If you keep your emotions in check and calm down for one damn second, you'll see that I'm not brown nosing anyone. But, I do agree with him much more than I do with you. Facts.

You're making lots of claims without backing them up, so to me it's all just your emotionally-driven, anecdotal observations about stuff. I can't take you seriously.

If you want to have a debate on the merits of the topics, without resorting to hyperbole and childish insults, I would be happy to interact with you. Otherwise, buzz off.

And I can’t take you seriously with your “Facts.” and “This guy knows what’s up.” which sounds like middle-school vernacular.

What am I supposed to back up? The fact that conservatives are far more religious? Or things that their Platform states? Because their desire to revoke gay marriage is quite literally in their Party Platform that’s available for everyone to see.

And I’m perfectly calm; I don’t consider “brown-nosing” to be anything other than a light-hearted insult. You also don’t have to be completely detached from emotions to have an argument. This isn’t a Philosophy 101 class

 

[InfiniteCombo]

And I can’t take you seriously with your “Facts.” and “This guy knows what’s up.” which sounds like middle-school vernacular.

What am I supposed to back up? The fact that conservatives are far more religious? Or things that their Platform states? Because their desire to revoke gay marriage is quite literally in their Party Platform that’s available for everyone to see.

And I’m perfectly calm; I don’t consider “brown-nosing” to be anything other than a light-hearted insult. You also don’t have to be completely detached from emotions to have an argument. This isn’t a Philosophy 101 class

That post was... Full of words. As to them making any sense whatsoever, that's a different matter. (Spoiler alert: they don't.)

This extended discussion, while seemingly "off topic," is actually not. One very important reason why this legal battle is going on between Elon and Twitter is because Elon is one of those people that is disillusioned with the modern left -- he's said as much, explicitly.

Some of the exchanges in this thread serve as a good microcosm of what's going on in society at large. The left, instead of arguing on the merits of topics, resort to childish insults, making points high on emotional content and low on factual content, and trying to shut down conversation. All while employing their irritatingly smarmy, "holier and smarter than though" attitude. (99% of the time they're neither smarter, nor holier.) All of that, ultimately, wrapped in a truly spectacular inability for self assessment and readjustment.

Lose votes? "It's the voting laws that are the problem."
Lose support from certain demographics? "We are not the problem, it's those demographics that are the problem."
Laws repeal their ideas? "It's the legislators that are the problem, it's not our ideas."
Fail to achieve anything in life? "We are not the problem, it's society that's the problem."

So I'll stick to my guns and say that, YES, I *am* socially liberal yet fully side with Azurro on this. But, forget about me, I'm just a random guy on the Internet.

Elon himself. Joe Rogan. Tim Pool. Bill Maher. J.K. Rowling. And many, many more liberals disillusioned with the modern left. But in the minds of many mainstream liberals/progressives, it's not they or their ideas that are the problem... Elon, Rogan, Rowling, Maher, etc are the problem.

So I'll say. Sure, keep your approach going. As far as changing hearts and minds, and winning policy and elections, my message to you is:

 

[DeepEnigma]

Gender ideology people can't even define what a woman or a man is

Oh they can... when it's politically convenient. Like a recent court precedent/ruling.

 

[GloveSlap]

I'm convinced the word gender only exists because the term "sex roles" sounded dirty.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

Oh they can... when it's politically convenient. Like a recent court precedent/ruling.

That's the thing... the more extreme the ideology gets, the clearer it is for other people to see the inconsistencies, contradictions, and "snake eating its own tail" that is going on.

 

[Maiden Voyage]

I'm convinced the word gender only exists because the term "sex roles" sounded dirty.

Let’s borrow from the gay community and just call people bottoms or tops.

 

[ANDS]

A vast majority of conservatives are religious to a fault. Not even considering trans-related stuff, their Platform straight up states that it wants to get rid of gay marriage and gay rights. And we just had the Abortion rights fiasco.

I think the reason you are getting so much pushback is because you're throwing out some insanely sweeping generalizations like ". . .conservatives are religious to a fault." Hackey generalizations like this (which indirectly tries to suggest that Democrats aren't as religious as Republicans) aren't really good springboards for conversations and I can see why they get folks dander up.

. . .and not for nothing but the 2016 GOP party platform doesn't "straight up state" that they want to get rid of gay marriage (and certainly not gay rights - whatever that means) but that it, like most arguments Republicans have, is a state right.

What any of this has to do with Musk pulling out of his Twitter deal -

 

[InfiniteCombo]

I think the reason you are getting so much pushback is because you're throwing out some insanely sweeping generalizations like ". . .conservatives are religious to a fault." Hackey generalizations like this (which indirectly tries to suggest that Democrats aren't as religious as Republicans) aren't really good springboards for conversations and I can see why they get folks dander up.

. . .and not for nothing but the 2016 GOP party platform doesn't "straight up state" that they want to get rid of gay marriage (and certainly not gay rights - whatever that means) but that it, like most arguments Republicans have, is a state right.

Excellent post all around. Agree with all of this. Making sweeping generalizations, accusations, and insults is not a good way to win people to your side, let alone even have a conversation in the first place.

What any of this has to do with Musk pulling out of his Twitter deal -

I'll quote myself from a few posts above:

This extended discussion, while seemingly "off topic," is actually not. One very important reason why this legal battle is going on between Elon and Twitter is because Elon is one of those people that is disillusioned with the modern left -- he's said as much, explicitly.

Some of the exchanges in this thread serve as a good microcosm of what's going on in society at large. The left, instead of arguing on the merits of topics, resort to childish insults, making points high on emotional content and low on factual content, and trying to shut down conversation. All while employing their irritatingly smarmy, "holier and smarter than though" attitude. (99% of the time they're neither smarter, nor holier.) All of that, ultimately, wrapped in a truly spectacular inability for self assessment and readjustment.

Elon himself. Joe Rogan. Tim Pool. Bill Maher. J.K. Rowling. And many, many more liberals disillusioned with the modern left. But in the minds of many mainstream liberals/progressives, it's not they or their ideas that are the problem... Elon, Rogan, Rowling, Maher, etc are the problem.

So I'll say. Sure, keep your approach going. As far as changing hearts and minds, and winning policy and elections, my message to you is:

 

[DeepEnigma]

Making sweeping generalizations, accusations, and insults is not a good way to win people to your side, let alone even have a conversation in the first place.

Amazing isn't it?

 

[DeaDPo0L84]

Poor biological women, all that hard work they fought for, and they're losing their spaces again. Get in back of the line, ladies.

What's batshit crazy is you have biological women who identify as a man causing their own self destruction, it's both sad and intriguing. The result of all this nonsense in the next few years is going to be insane, I won't feel sorry for the adults, children on the other hand I will have a heavy heart for, they're paying a heavy price.

 

[DeaDPo0L84]

The religious side is far more in touch with reality than the (generally much more) secular side? Okay. That is hilarious

Liberals keep hammering the religious nature of the republican party as if it's this major fault. But if the moral guidelines or belief system is sound who gives a fuck what they're based on? I have this argument with friends all the time as a conservative who gives zero shits about church/religion.

They don't believe babies should be aborted all the way up to 9 months, introduced to drag shows, or be mutilated at a young age under pressure by the gender ideology cult causing irreversible damage and a very difficult life ahead of them. If they say all this and end it with "because the Bible tells me so" so what, guess what all those things are still pretty fucking sound principles to standby and things every logical person could agree on 30 seconds ago.

But now "the other side" is pushing those very things, fuck that noise. I'll take Jesus freaks who say dumb religous shit sometimes but actually stand on solid logical principles versus whatever the fuck is going on under that circus tent in the Whitehouse.

 

[LegendOfKage]

It is not a rhetorical question, when you answer "anyone that identifies as a woman is a woman", that's a circular definition. What is the definition of a woman?

Nope it's not a circular definition, that would just be "a woman is a woman".

I read this exchange. As someone who has gotten into debates on the pro-trans side of things on this website before, and has often tried to explain trans issues with people who disagree, I still have to say this is circular logic. Just forget about the trans aspect of the question for a moment, and you'll maybe be able to see "an X is anyone who identifies as X" really doesn't explain what the term means in the first place.

Consider someone hearing the word gay for the first time. For the sake of argument, let's say English isn't their first language. They then ask you what gay means, and you say "a gay person is anyone that identifies as gay." Okay, now that you've said that, do they understand what a gay person is? No, they wouldn't. You do not need to say "a gay person is a gay person" for you to have used circular logic.

I would imagine, like you, I'm someone who would like to see more support and understanding for trans individuals in our society. I just don't see the denial of biological sex as the best way to get there.


Bringing the topic back to Musk, while it might not have to do with Twitter itself, here's another reason some might criticize the man. I have to say, I wasn't aware that Tesla was doing this.

 

[funkygunther]

I read this exchange. As someone who has gotten into debates on the pro-trans side of things on this website before, and has often tried to explain trans issues with people who disagree, I still have to say this is circular logic. Just forget about the trans aspect of the question for a moment, and you'll maybe be able to see "an X is anyone who identifies as X" really doesn't explain what the term means in the first place.

Consider someone hearing the word gay for the first time. For the sake of argument, let's say English isn't their first language. They then ask you what gay means, and you say "a gay person is anyone that identifies as gay." Okay, now that you've said that, do they understand what a gay person is? No, they wouldn't. You do not need to say "a gay person is a gay person" for you to have used circular logic.

I would imagine, like you, I'm someone who would like to see more support and understanding for trans individuals in our society. I just don't see the denial of biological sex as the best way to get there.

That's the thing, we're not hearing the term "woman" for the first time though. It was flaccid bait based on that alone.

Context is important and word definitions are just as susceptible to contextual changes. The keyword identity is also important, just as a definition of national identity would have similar pratfalls. And lastly, had someone somehow in our society not heard the term "woman" before they could have looked at a dictionary, where even merriam-webster employs a circular definition when defining gender identity. So if its ok for them, it should be OK for Mr Bean who hasn't heard the term before.

And on top of all this I have also not denied biological sex but even those indicators are complicated even taking gender identity out of the equation.

 

[EviLore]

Ah yes, the Gender Official Thread.