Elon Musk's Ego Threatens To Drive Twitter off a Cliff

I am giving him the benefit of doubt. He has been successful with his other businesses, so I assume he has some kind of plan, although it looks like he is running some kind of reality show with it. More like a hobby than a serious business.

 

I see it differently: as owing to the well known distortion of reality, which has been grandly exhibited, this year, by Vladimir Putin (or as one can see, in the theatrical device, framing Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew). Everyone tells Musk that he's a genius, and that he can turn anything to gold, just with his touch. Additionally, his prior experience, buttresses this feeling of infallibility (just as Putin's earlier land grabs, reinforced his own delusions). So I think what we are seeing, is a bright man, completely unprepared for the job he has taken upon himself. I also sense that, for Musk, his Ego might be an Achilles' heel, or at least a flaw. When you combine that, with the spotlight, that this endeavor has focused on Musk's every move, it makes even more difficult his accepting that he'd bitten off more than he could effectively chew, on his own-- which is an important, perhaps even necessary first step, before he can begin climbing the required learning curve, looming before him.


That said, I have to admit that I have extremely little, personal experience with Twitter, specifically, or with social media sites, in general (other than that this one). So I am using the facts presented, to conclude there had been good reason for Twitter to have had a group, for example, dedicated to extirpating posts encouraging "Child Sexual Abuse," of the size which former management had deemed necessary. Since this type of safeguarding of a website's content is not even remotely close to anything, of which I possess firsthand knowledge, I must of course allow for the possibility, at any rate, that Musk might prove everyone else wrong, and get the same job accomplished, with only a fraction of the personnel. If he were to be able to accomplish this, it would greatly augment his image of invincibility.

I think it is more likely, however, that Occam's razor, here, applies, and that this is simply a matter of unwarranted overconfidence.

 

Hardly something to brag about, as your chief accomplishment (FYI, for the clueless: my ending "insult," was patterned after, and explicitly only applicable in the situation in which, your own, unaddressed comment, had been meant to include me as a target). IOW, if my post is an insult to you, it would only be because you had initiated the insulting.

* Also, something dubious for you to boast of, is being unable to digest more than a few words at a time, regardless of the topic, they intend to cover.

 

Morgan Stanley CEO on Elon Musk: " Wouldn’t bet against him" ...​

~ Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman on Thursday spoke favorably about billionaire Elon Musk at the Reuters NEXT conference.
"Elon Musk is an extraordinary executive. Very few people create global businesses that are transformational in industries. Many people aspire to. Very few actually pull it off."
"I wouldn’t bet against Elon Musk. He’s an innovator. He’s obviously very, very sophisticated financially." the Morgan Stanley CEO said.

" I will expose the nonsense, allow free speech and Tweet my way to excellence. "​

 

Your post had been almost completely non sequitur to mine, which it addresses. Or maybe, yours just ignores everything I'd said, in order to simply repeat your own viewpoint, to which my post (ignored by your reply) had offered my response. You are trying to make the case that if one can manage in one scenario, they be expected to do so, nearly as well, in any other industry, or type of business. I disagree that this is as universal of a rule, as you contend; it may or may not be true, in any given case, based on the particulars. Would Bill Parcells-- a masterful manager, in the sport of football-- be just as effective, leading Cisco Systems, or U.S. Healthcare, or Sony Entertainment? I think there is good reason to be less than certain, of those things.

Without realizing it, you are proving my case: that Musk did not recognize his limitations; that running one business is not more or less the same as running any other. Now, if we were discussing a middle manager position, I would say there is more truth to your claim. But there is far more for a CEO to decide, than which is the most qualified candidate, to hire, & so on; and all the CEO decisions in any one business, neither automatically apply to, nor fully cover, the issues faced by every other CEO. Running the Trump Real Estate Empire, is far from identical, to being the Chief Executive, of the United States.

Had Musk recognized his limitations, he would have done just what you recommend, above, and brought in knowledgeable consultants, expert assistants, or the like. My impression, however, is that he is consulting with no one, prior to his hasty moves, including all those firings, which he has needed to walk back.

 

You do understand.

So, you continue to believe that the worlds richest man is a fool for not taking your advice. We all understand that. So.... you must be the worlds second richest man??

 

You don't "follow" an illogical point; don't address it as if it was.

So, you continue to believe that the worlds richest man is a fool for not taking your advice. We all understand that. So.... you must be the worlds second richest man??

 

And this is a very good time to do so. Twitter is hemorrhaging liberal customers and somebody is picking them up

 

You're right. Surely, somebody will build a new cesspool to take advantage of the demand.

 

Correction-- for not taking your advice! You'd just lectured upon the need for a person, if they are wise, to recognize their "limitations," and to seek "someone who knows," when one is in a field, in which one is out of his depth. And yet Musk is not consulting with the more knowledgeable people, in this very different field, than either manufacturing, or space flight. So, it is the precepts which you have advocated, which dictate the judgement, that Musk has been acting rashly, with unrealistic confidence in his own expertise, and overly prideful, in not seeking greater understanding, from those with more experience.

Unfortunately, your words were apparently only so much hogwash, in your own mind, as you feel that the poor light, your own, endorsed principals, cast upon Musk's actions, are not worth acknowledging.

 

And finally, after all your meaningless, and insincere discourse, you finally give your true opinion: the fact that one is rich, and has succeeded, means that no one has any credibility, unless they have succeeded to a greater extent, in thinking that that the richer man, ever makes a mistake. A truly elitist philosophy, you espouse: wealth makes right. Your concept, that having succeeded to a greater degree than anyone else, makes it impossible for a person to ever make a misstep, is patently a foolish belief-- regardless of your net worth. Anyone can make an error in their judgement; even the richest man in the world. Truth is not dependent upon the past financial success, of the principals, involved in any given situation.

 

Di you actually graduate from anything?

 

Do you actually have an argument, to counter any of my points? Other than to try to make it about me, that is?


If you think about it-- wouldn't it only be more of an embarrassment to you, if the person who just bested your own thinking, had no higher education?

I guess that was just one more thing, you'd failed to consider.

 

You have neither points or argument, and you fail to track the conversation.
I could discuss this with the knob on my door with equal success.
When you can do what those you criticize can do- then you might have something to say.
Until then, you're just a noise in the background. And your imagination is working overtime.

 

Look at that-- nothing but more hypocrisy! Who could possibly have guessed, that the person who, no doubt, criticizes the childishness of petty, personal insults, when they are directed at him, now resorts to petty, personal insults, when he has been beaten with the very arguments, he had offered-- further demonstrating, that you have no logical argument, of which to speak.

Up to now, you've offered nothing to support your argument, save your personal, "sage" wisdom, without any actual examples-- which I had provided, to demonstrate my own points (despite your now pretending that I hadn't made any of those).

But you claim that talking to me, is equivalent to talking to a doorknob-- so that must be true, right? Yet, my own claims of, say, your hypocrisy, naturally, are all disregardable?

Just curious, because I am so sure that everything you maintain, comes from a place of true, personal understanding: how often do you have conversations, with your doorknobs?

 

And Democrats insist on voting them into office...

 

Elon musk attempts to restore free speech to Twitter, and leftists hate it. Count me unsurprised.

 

I'm saying you don't track the conversation- you write english but seem to have no comprehension of what I've said. Could be several reasons, the mildest of which is we live in different worlds psychologically. T me- fantasy is something for entertainment, and you don't selectively prune things down to see what you want. If you read again, you could see I didn't call you a doorknob, I said I could get as much success in attempting to communicate with a doorknob as I have with you.

The liberal avoidance of straight talk is neither new nor appreciated by real people. I'm not the one making you what you are, making you see or feel what you do- YOU are that person.
And unfortunately, you have no idea that you haven't actually scored a point here at all. You haven't "beaten " me, and I haven't beaten you- but you have beaten yourself. I'd suggest you think on that.

 

“Elon's talking point, is that he is about "free speech."

And yet he’s already banned Kanye

 

You are the one, doing all the double talk, of which, your post above, is just the latest example. Just because I do not accept your view, does not mean that I don't "track," the conversation. I, in fact, addressed your points; it has been you, who have avoided acknowledging mine. Likewise, your whole claim that I have "beaten" myself-- once more, as all the rest of your claims, devoid of anything to backup the assertion-- is your own fantasy fabrication.

So, once more, just to show you how it's done, I will prove that my contentions are factual, and your counter narrative, is utter bullshit.

Your original post:
spiritgide said: ↑
It's always amazing that people who's capacity for success is perhaps 1/10 of 1% of someone like Musk, feel confident in telling him what he's doing right or wrong.
As "Dirty Harry" once said- a man's got to know his limitations...

My Reply:
DEFinning said: ↑
So it is your hypothesis that being a successful, rich person, makes one incapable of making mistakes, or at least should cause anyone less successful to pretend they don't perceive these mistakes? As I've said to several others, please tell me what things I cited in the OP, as mistakes, do you, personally, not see this way?

But wait, there may be a problem in that, since I cited articles by Bloomberg: are you as successful as Michael Bloomberg? Somehow, I highly doubt it. So how could you criticize his news service? Wouldn't you then be doing exactly what you imply that I am doing? Or are you as much a personal success as former Secretary of Labor and now highly successful author, Robert Reich, who broke down Musk's stupidity, in the OP's final snip? One would then have to wonder, if you know your own limitations.


As should be obvious, I have directly addressed, from the get- go, what I identified as your point of view: that no one should be taken seriously, with any criticisms of anyone more successful than himself. This, it should be easy to see, establishes a hierarchy, in which those with more wealth & success, are to be considered increasingly less able to do wrong, or at least to be faulted for it, the fewer people that remain who are richer or more successful than they. This is the "fantasy" paradigm, which you are proposing.

Now, let's see how well your reply can "track" my argument. You start off, by insulting your own reasoning. Apparently you somehow did not grasp that my 2nd paragraph, above, was showing the foolishness of your own argument, by turning it around on you. If, according to you, I should not have any criticism of, or see any mistake in anything Musk does, because he is so much more successful than me, then you should not be able to contradict Mike Bloomberg, whose Business News Service, I had used for numerous of my citations, of Musk's mistakes. You immediately recognize that this is an illogical method, for deciding who is right, but you somehow do not recognize that is precisely the one that you had advocated, in your initial post.

spiritgide said: ↑
Avoiding common sense again? Everybody makes mistakes, regardless of their level in society. Those who know themselves make more legitimate ones, those who do not make more stupid and obvious ones. Bloomberg, for example, on farming... A very successful billionaire, making a fool of himself on national TV, and unaware he was doing so. Stepped beyond his limitations, his expertise.
<End snip>

I am pausing here to point out, that what you explain above-- that everyone makes mistakes, no matter how rich or successful they are-- is precisely MY argument; and something which flies in the face, of the argument you had just made, in your prior post:

spiritgide said: ↑
It's always amazing that people who's capacity for success is perhaps 1/10 of 1% of someone like Musk, feel confident in telling him what he's doing right or wrong.
As "Dirty Harry" once said- a man's got to know his limitations...
<End>

So which is it? Does "everyone make mistakes," or does anyone at a far lower level of success, have no place, in pointing to mistakes of their "betters?" You seem to want to have it both ways, depending on whether it applies to me, or to you.

Continuing, with your reply, you now jump back over to the other side of your argument:

I am pausing your reply, once more, because you are about to go into a long story which, yet, does nothing to truly make your argument so, before we get too far away from it, I wish to point to something I have highlighted your bringing up, twice, but have not yet mentioned. That is because you are asserting a point which is-- as with the "everyone makes mistakes," comment-- supportive of MY argument. In your first post, you state, "a man's got to know his limitations," and in the initial paragraph of your second post, you say that Bloomberg made "a fool of himself," by "Stepping beyond his limitations, his expertise." This, FYI, is one of your arguments, which I told you that I used against you, to prove my own case. Apparently it escapes you, that my argument is that, in trying to run Twitter-- which is an entirely different business model, from what Musk knows (car manufacturing, and space rockets), Musk is stepping beyond his own areas of expertise.



Actually, because this post is now getting rather long, I will continue with your long anecdote-- which in no way prosecutes an actual debate argument-- in a second installment, showing precisely what I had claimed: that it was actually your own arguments, which had proven my point; that I had addressed every one of the points you had tried to make; that it was you, who failed to respond to my points; and that, clearly, if you do not even realize that I had offered any points, then it is none other than yourself, who could not stay up to speed, in our debate.

 

Much more likely you are confused posting or deeply disinformed.

 

Musk fired 75 percent of twitter and guess what? It's still working.

 

apply that mindset to DC and we can actually start reducing the debt....

 

I know the left us really hoping twitter will fail because new ownership doesn't like their intolerant control of media platforms...

But it won't.

The few thousand remaining employees at twitter are easily covered by Musk's net worth and value.

Essentially, he has a whole lot of "**** you money"... and the left hates it.

How dare twitter not be mouth piece for the left!

 

The left has invested heavily in platforms they control like fascists thinking nobody can touch them. Google and Apple are prime examples, using their popular platforms to push political agendas. That's not really debatable when you look at the censorship history.

The left is scared. That's all.

What we have is a person with a boat load of money that is creating waves in these left wing controlled information platforms, and they can't cut him out.

Within 5 years, musk will roll out a new cellular platform that relies on his starlink satellite system and will truly challenge this established l establishment.

They are scared of the loss of control.