isn't the bolded just semantics for the purpose of this conversation though (I still don't get the legal intricacies that perhaps you're getting at but irrelevant for the sake the point being made perhaps)?
oh, in that case, no I don't think discriminating against users in a private platform is against the law. Storm front (nazi forum which would ban blacks in a heart beat) did not get booted by their hosts for being discriminatory, it got booted under public pressure of domain hosts.
I am just saying Musk can change twitter signifiantly and decide to ban the entire left side of the spectrum if he wanted to....he can rewrite tos or make them vague enough to give his moderators lots of leeway to feed into any crazy idea he comes up with.
Got it, and yes, I agree and hinted at it (I think you kind of came into the defense of it when Bee responded to my statement). I even claimed the value to Musk is in controlling the conversation for political and eventual monetary goals through legislation, not through monetizing the platform directly. (a tad tinfoil I'll admit). Though why would Rupert Murdoch, Bezos, and on and on own media companies otherwise?
Sorry for the confusion, seems we are saying hte smae thing but I got confused/hung up on one comment from Vic so lets say it is all Vic fucking fault
As I said musk can do what he wants with twitter, I think it is a shit show, just ask Kyrie and Kanye... but Tesla stock could be below $100 in 2 years if its CEO cares more about this shit then facing an increasing competitive market for EVs
At least this is an idea that has been proven to be a money-maker. Just check out how OnlyFans is doing. But does Musk really want Twitter to be a porn platform? Twitter Exploring 'Paywalled Video' Which Would Obviously Be Flooded With Porn Elon Musk has been desperately looking for ways to make Twitter profitable after paying $44 billion for the site. https://gizmodo.com/twitter-paywalled-video-porn-elon-musk-onlyfans-verify-1849731076