Honestly I think he was defending the idea of 'read the whole thing' & not Elon.

I do share your prediction that given the ambiguous wording of the cross posting section this will likely involve the feelings of the supreme leader of twitter.

> There's no need to defend Elon here.

There is at least arguably value in defending/pursuing the truth though.

> Clearly what will happen is highly capricious enforcement based on who he personally likes and dislikes.

Visions of the future are sometimes not as accurate as they appear due to shortcomings in the simulator.

> > There's no need to defend Elon here.

> There is at least arguably value in defending/pursuing the truth though.

Indeed, it seems to simply be the case that the company is supporting “paid speech”.

Perhaps, but whether that is actually true is the tricky part....though truth seems to be not very interesting/fun to some cultures, so they instead imagine "truth" into existence and discuss that instead.

If no one breaks character (so far so good in this thread), it works out really good, ignoring the consequences of course.

I think it is pretty clear this is the case, I mean look at any post he has responded to with dislike in the last month -- every day there is a queue of disabled accounts that have interacted with musk or poked his thin skin.

At the end of the day as far as i am concerned its a dead platform -- just the ad reductions against the 1bn + interest means the runway is on fire. Whatever elon does at this point is just pretending to do work effort while juggling balls in the air. It is clear he will not only tank twitter but given he has already hit a sell off cliff on tesla shares he will be licky to have any relevent input on that corp in the near future.

I'm talking about this policy, not Musk. I think the policy is stupid and I think we should argue against it. "Musk won't follow the policy" is not a criticism of the policy. There's plenty of room here to criticize the policy on its own merits.

There is tons and tons of evidence that Musk is moderating capriciously at this point.

You misunderstand. The person he was ascribing motivations to was me. My intent is not to defend Musk here.

> You should stop ascribing motivations to people without evidence.

I very much agree, however doing that first requires that one is able to perceive reality without making errors, and that is a lot harder than it seems.

As for censorship: all platforms have it, including HN, and opinions (aka: reality) vary on which approach is best.