6 ms·

Possibly malicious enforcement by Twitter staff in light of https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1604593057676300288 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/16045930

Possibly malicious enforcement by Twitter staff in light of https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1604593057676300288 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1604593057676300288 “Casually sharing occasional links is fine, but no more relentless advertising of competitors for free, which is absurd in the extreme”

sytelus 4y ago
Where interpretation of "casually" and "occasional" is left to the Emperor.
- dm319 4y ago
  And what interpretation of 'absurd in the extreme' should we take?
- seydor 4y ago
  there was always an emperor
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    No, in the past there was a committee. There is zero evidence that the previous CEO of Twitter personally judged who was and who was not to be banned.
    - Ferrotin 4y ago
      We know that was Vijaya and Roth. Bringing up Dorsey is transparent sleight of hand.
    - hackernewds 4y ago
      The previous CEO of Twitter barely did any work. It was frequent to hear chickens and birds in the background of Jack's video calls.
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        > The previous CEO of Twitter barely did any work. I wished the current one was half as clever.
soneca 4y ago
The written policy contradicts his statement.
ipsum2 4y ago
It's just "enforcement", there's nothing malicious about it. Elon Musk is the CEO and policymaker of Twitter now, he's responsible for the actions his company takes.
2pEXgD0fZ5cF 4y ago
The first word that came to mind when I read the new rule was "arbitrariness". I did not expect to be proven right this fast, honestly.
Hoyadonis 4y ago
I wouldn't be surprised if the employee who did this gets fired as a result of this. In fact, I'd be shocked if @paulg isn't reinstated within 48 hours (as they did with Taylor Lorenz a few hours ago.) All of Musk's previous interactions with Graham suggests that their relationship is friendly. And if there's one thing we've seen from Elon Musk's Twitter, it's that he's not hesitant to fire Twitter employees.
- forgetfulness 4y ago
  That'd be extremely unfair. It was extremely dangerous to Mr. Musk's estate that Paul Graham used his clout to entice people to switch to Mastodon. This was nothing but a display of unswerving loyalty and adherence to Mr. Musk's vision.
- JumpinJack_Cash 4y ago
  > > All of Musk's previous interactions with Graham suggests that their relationship is friendly. Mohammed bin Salman invited 30 of his closest friends to discuss public projects before arresting them and torturing them in the Ritz Carlton Don’t ever fall into the trap of anthropomorphism of autocrats
- NavinF 4y ago
  > I'd be shocked if @paulg isn't reinstated within 48 hours The only reasonable comment in this thread. He was reinstated a few minutes ago.
PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
"competitors" ? I thought that Lonnie was bringing us Twitter: The True Public Square? How can there be any competitors for a public square?
lapcat 4y ago
How many malicious employees do you think would be left at this point? There have been massive layoffs, and anyone who didn't like Musk or the "extreme hardcore" could have taken the severance.
- Denvercoder9 4y ago
  > anyone who didn't like Musk or the "extreme hardcore" could have taken the severance If they aren't held hostage by a H-1B visa.
  - lapcat 4y ago
    Right, but if you're still there because you can't leave, then you're not going to do something stupid to get yourself immediately fired, like going rogue and suspending Paul Graham's account.
- Ferrotin 4y ago
  Content moderators can’t switch jobs so easily.
  - lapcat 4y ago
    Which is why they won't go rogue: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34044705 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34044705
    - Ferrotin 4y ago
      Content moderators aren’t on H1-B’s.
      - lapcat 4y ago
        Sigh. Just completely missing the point. If an employee couldn't afford to leave before — for whatever reason! — then they can't magically afford to leave today either.
jacquesm 4y ago
Staff?
forgetfulness 4y ago
Malicious? Elon Musk wants employees to have utmost loyalty to him, what's malicious to risk taking the fall by clicking the ban button on the rich, famous and powerful to safeguard the vision of the visionary CEO? This was fulfillment of orders beyond the call of duty. Graham was a threat to the Master, what's a loyal servant to do?

sytelus 4y ago

Where interpretation of "casually" and "occasional" is left to the Emperor.

dm319 4y ago
And what interpretation of 'absurd in the extreme' should we take?
seydor 4y ago
there was always an emperor
- jacquesm 4y ago
  No, in the past there was a committee. There is zero evidence that the previous CEO of Twitter personally judged who was and who was not to be banned.
  - Ferrotin 4y ago
    We know that was Vijaya and Roth. Bringing up Dorsey is transparent sleight of hand.
  - hackernewds 4y ago
    The previous CEO of Twitter barely did any work. It was frequent to hear chickens and birds in the background of Jack's video calls.
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      > The previous CEO of Twitter barely did any work. I wished the current one was half as clever.

soneca 4y ago

The written policy contradicts his statement.

ipsum2 4y ago

It's just "enforcement", there's nothing malicious about it. Elon Musk is the CEO and policymaker of Twitter now, he's responsible for the actions his company takes.

2pEXgD0fZ5cF 4y ago

The first word that came to mind when I read the new rule was "arbitrariness". I did not expect to be proven right this fast, honestly.

Hoyadonis 4y ago

I wouldn't be surprised if the employee who did this gets fired as a result of this. In fact, I'd be shocked if @paulg isn't reinstated within 48 hours (as they did with Taylor Lorenz a few hours ago.) All of Musk's previous interactions with Graham suggests that their relationship is friendly. And if there's one thing we've seen from Elon Musk's Twitter, it's that he's not hesitant to fire Twitter employees.

forgetfulness 4y ago
That'd be extremely unfair. It was extremely dangerous to Mr. Musk's estate that Paul Graham used his clout to entice people to switch to Mastodon. This was nothing but a display of unswerving loyalty and adherence to Mr. Musk's vision.
JumpinJack_Cash 4y ago
> > All of Musk's previous interactions with Graham suggests that their relationship is friendly. Mohammed bin Salman invited 30 of his closest friends to discuss public projects before arresting them and torturing them in the Ritz Carlton Don’t ever fall into the trap of anthropomorphism of autocrats
NavinF 4y ago
> I'd be shocked if @paulg isn't reinstated within 48 hours The only reasonable comment in this thread. He was reinstated a few minutes ago.

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago

"competitors" ? I thought that Lonnie was bringing us Twitter: The True Public Square? How can there be any competitors for a public square?

lapcat 4y ago

How many malicious employees do you think would be left at this point? There have been massive layoffs, and anyone who didn't like Musk or the "extreme hardcore" could have taken the severance.

Denvercoder9 4y ago
> anyone who didn't like Musk or the "extreme hardcore" could have taken the severance If they aren't held hostage by a H-1B visa.
- lapcat 4y ago
  Right, but if you're still there because you can't leave, then you're not going to do something stupid to get yourself immediately fired, like going rogue and suspending Paul Graham's account.
Ferrotin 4y ago
Content moderators can’t switch jobs so easily.
- lapcat 4y ago
  Which is why they won't go rogue: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34044705 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34044705
  - Ferrotin 4y ago
    Content moderators aren’t on H1-B’s.
    - lapcat 4y ago
      Sigh. Just completely missing the point. If an employee couldn't afford to leave before — for whatever reason! — then they can't magically afford to leave today either.

jacquesm 4y ago

Staff?

forgetfulness 4y ago

Malicious? Elon Musk wants employees to have utmost loyalty to him, what's malicious to risk taking the fall by clicking the ban button on the rich, famous and powerful to safeguard the vision of the visionary CEO? This was fulfillment of orders beyond the call of duty. Graham was a threat to the Master, what's a loyal servant to do?