You are the one bringing politics into this, not the comment that you are falsely accusing of being politically motivated, with some sort of "free speech" nonsense and an image that has been filled with so many tweets that it's not even legible. Even collecting that image is odd and strange and shows highly politically motivated behavior on your part!
Twitter's valuation with investors was based on the idea of heavy growth. It wasn't even profitable when purchased, and when it did make a profit, it was on the order of $1B/year, nothing that would validate it's market cap.
Musk squashed all potential for growth. Twitter advertisers, users, and the hope of a brighter future are all gone now. A well-established brand has been abandoned for an amorphous X, on which it's pretty much impossible to establish a new brand.
Musk has destroyed so value much from Twitter with bone-headed moves that if he had to answer to investors, he'd be out in a second.
No, I literally can not. The interface of imgur does not allow zooming in to see what is in the Tweets! Collecting that many tweets into such a massive image is the behavior of a crazy person, likely motivated by crazy politics. I do not know what's in the Tweets that's supposed to be objectionable, but the obsessive collection of stuff like that, and spending the time to create such an unreadable way.
> "If you care about what I say you are weird, and you care because you are an evil person"
Who are you quoting? Who brought evil into this? Very weird thing to start your comment with, what is your point?
In my opinion, if I had said anything that you could demonstrate to be false, you would quote what I said and present an explanation for why it's false. I believe you're not doing that because you cannot do it.
> You are the one bringing politics into this
No, that's not true. The person I responded to characterized the old, pre-musk twitter as "a place where decent human beings cared to gather" and contrasted that with the current twitter.
What possible non-political interpretation of that viewpoint is there? He is clearly saying that when twitter was run by people on the political-left, and (for example) Trump was banned, that was "decent human beings."
My rebuttal is to show a large list of verified accounts making hateful statements. My point is, those statements were allowed under pre-musk twitter. Hate was allowed before, and it's allowed now.
The only difference is that the person I responded to finds the former brand of it acceptable.
Which part of this analysis is incorrect?
> Even collecting that image is odd and strange
It's odd and strange to pretend that you believe I personally collected those examples. You're well aware of how the internet works. You know that someone else created that image.
If you're not a horrible person, then why are you too embarrassed to post under your real name or at least your normal account, and why are you carrying the water for fascists?
Twitter's valuation with investors was based on the idea of heavy growth. It wasn't even profitable when purchased, and when it did make a profit, it was on the order of $1B/year, nothing that would validate it's market cap.
Musk squashed all potential for growth. Twitter advertisers, users, and the hope of a brighter future are all gone now. A well-established brand has been abandoned for an amorphous X, on which it's pretty much impossible to establish a new brand.
Musk has destroyed so value much from Twitter with bone-headed moves that if he had to answer to investors, he'd be out in a second.