Off Topic Elon Musk

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Has anyone felt the effects of the Tesla backlash yet...
I only use X to get the footy clips but I'm getting to the stage of deleting my account.

You must log in or register to see media
I joined Bluesky RTB, it's full of Sunderland supporters.

I deleted my account on X but realised that Sunderland AFC don't have a Bluesky account yet so I had to reactivate it.
 
Last edited:
Yeah. You don’t get loads of in-match updates but I don’t think they did much on Twitter either. Plus Copley from the echo posts match updates pretty regularly on there.
Ta. It's only the team news, an hour before KO. that I use it for if that's on bluesky I'll move to that.
 
This is genuinely a serious question/observation. Elon Musk is the owner of X. The previous owners got to decide who was and wasn’t allowed to post on their platform and removed those who they decided didn’t align with their values. Musk comes along and says that’s wrong, buys Twitter, renaming it X and allows a lot if not all of the banned users back.
Surely that is the right thing to do? Just because someone disagrees with you that isn’t a reason to refuse their right to disagree. It’s a fundamental human right to be allowed to voice an opinion isn’t it? I’m minded of a quote I read a long time ago studying for the sergeants exam in the UK and refers to how the law in a free society should be applied. It’s something similar to “everything is allowed except that which is expressly forbidden”. Contrast that to a country like North Korea where freedom of speech is severely curtailed and that phrase is turned on its head.
As I say, serious question or observation from someone who doesn’t have any social media accounts.
 
This is genuinely a serious question/observation. Elon Musk is the owner of X. The previous owners got to decide who was and wasn’t allowed to post on their platform and removed those who they decided didn’t align with their values. Musk comes along and says that’s wrong, buys Twitter, renaming it X and allows a lot if not all of the banned users back.
Surely that is the right thing to do? Just because someone disagrees with you that isn’t a reason to refuse their right to disagree. It’s a fundamental human right to be allowed to voice an opinion isn’t it? I’m minded of a quote I read a long time ago studying for the sergeants exam in the UK and refers to how the law in a free society should be applied. It’s something similar to “everything is allowed except that which is expressly forbidden”. Contrast that to a country like North Korea where freedom of speech is severely curtailed and that phrase is turned on its head.
As I say, serious question or observation from someone who doesn’t have any social media accounts.

Free speech needs to be balanced with the freedom of identity, religion, gender, disability etc.

Absolute freedom of expression is problematic as it eventually impedes on other people's freedom not to be discriminated against.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C Montgomery Burns
This is genuinely a serious question/observation. Elon Musk is the owner of X. The previous owners got to decide who was and wasn’t allowed to post on their platform and removed those who they decided didn’t align with their values. Musk comes along and says that’s wrong, buys Twitter, renaming it X and allows a lot if not all of the banned users back.
Surely that is the right thing to do? Just because someone disagrees with you that isn’t a reason to refuse their right to disagree. It’s a fundamental human right to be allowed to voice an opinion isn’t it? I’m minded of a quote I read a long time ago studying for the sergeants exam in the UK and refers to how the law in a free society should be applied. It’s something similar to “everything is allowed except that which is expressly forbidden”. Contrast that to a country like North Korea where freedom of speech is severely curtailed and that phrase is turned on its head.
As I say, serious question or observation from someone who doesn’t have any social media accounts.

‘It’s a fundamental human right to be allowed to voice an opinion isn’t it?’


Of course it is and not being able to voice that opinion, on one platform or another, doesn’t mean that human right has been removed. Your right to disagree hasn’t been removed, but you wouldn’t reasonably expect to be able to post any opinion anywhere.

It's just a case of ‘my house, my rules’.

I wouldn’t have you in mine if you were demanding compulsory euthanasia at 70 years old …

… I’d only have six months left <laugh>