That poll is such utter bullshit. Musk never intended to stay on as Twitter CEO forever. He was always going to be an interim CEO. As owner of the company he will become the chairman of the board and he will hire a traditional yes-man executive to take care of the day to day.
The poll is a publicity stunt to make the people think he really is a 'people's man'. Poll says he quits? He quits and hires his yes-man. Poll says he stays? He stays for 2-3 months and then hires his yes-man
I think the image of a people's man isn't going to work. That may be what he thinks is going to happen but what he really did was generate a two minutes hate for himself. People love to hate what they can successfully hate on and feel like they are successful at getting their way. Look at Donald Trump, we had plenty of reasons to dislike him, I wish more of us had, but they only had retarded reasons and it became a sport.
Elon just gave them a sense of winning in a sport called hate Elon. Does he think people are going to play that sport less if they have a sense that they are good at it and it and playing it has given them a feeling of accomplishment?
I think that democracy works as long as you highly limit who gets a vote, and what proportion. You should never be able to vote yourself power or other people's labor (wealth); a public teacher should never be able to vote for school board (i know, we shouldn't have public schools, and wouldn't if we could get rid of this shit).
I have a plan to solve our voting problem that should ne satisfactory to both sides.
Weighted voting system
1. 1 to 100 vote power
I don't know exactly how to weigh the system but at 18 you get 1 vote.
As you get older and wiser you get one more vote power per year
Married get 2 more vote power 1 more vote power per kid
For the liberal retards there can be test to take to show you have a grasp of the system and are educated in history and goverment philosophy etc this can increase your voting power.
If you are a felon you go back to 1 voting power
Welfare you have zero voting power
I am sure a somewhat fair system can be made but right now a family man with a business providing jobs and paying tons of taxes should have more voting power then a welfare crack whore with 7 kids who is a drain on the system and who votes for more welfare each year
Weighting voting isn't a bad idea. What I had in mind was 1) every year the election rolls are purged and everyone has to register to vote again. This would be from Jan 1st to stay Apr 1st. So none of this MTV's cunt the vote or motor voter bullshit. 2) You can only register if you paid into the income tax system in the prior year. So professional welfare parasites who don't work and file a tax return with 17 dependents and getting $13,000 "refund" can't vote.
I know not everyone does math, but using something like the log of your net pay-in for anything dealing with money or positions that deal with money. So if your paycheck was directly from the government or you were a contractor and that was paid by the government then that would count against you. If you were a farmer taking CRP money then that would count against you. if you were a public employee you couldn't vote.
after that you take the log, so if you paid exactly $10 in net taxes that would be a power of 1, $100 = 2, $1000 = 3 ....
So normal people paying $10k would get 4, and very wealthy paying $1M would get 6.
Anyway, it will never happen until we rebuild society, and that will take a bit of strife.
First, let's just pretend this wasn't a stunt to create the mirage that he is doing "what the people want", when he was going to be stepping away anyway. We can pretend that's not true.
But even in pretend world, the implication of this move is anathema to the principles he stated going in, i.e. free speech. Free speech is not preserved by democracy.
Free speech is preserved violently, not amicably. It is preserved against our natures, not by them. The amicable solution means 51% get to determine what happens at the expense of the other 49%. "The people", in itself, is a group of mostly scared idiots. They want a story. They'll give up their freedom to the first bidder who sells them the right story.
Free speech is included in a larger notion of freedom, which most people don't actually want. They have to be forced to accept it.
You don't get it by letting the crowd decide by mass appeal.
This is so retarded. While Elon wasn't the best for free speech and seemed to be waffling with the details of how that works giving the left what they want is a mistake. So is giving them a sense of authority to cancel whoever they want for not letting them cancel whoever they want, even to the point that they feel that they are entitled to remove CEOs of companies.
My guess is he realized that he owns many companies but can only be CEO of so many and that it would make more sense to not waste his time on twitter wars, both damaging his investment, the health of other companies he owns, and creating more of an uphill battle for free speech initiatives than is necessary. But this is not how you announce the transition.
He needs to put in a proper free speech ideologue that is well known and has no other reputation to be damaged. "You mean you are going to allow..." Yes. You can't even act shocked because their philosophy is well known.
[ + ] AryanPrime
[ - ] AryanPrime 5 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 11:29:25 ago (+5/-0)
[ + ] Glowbright
[ - ] Glowbright 5 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 10:36:33 ago (+5/-0)
The poll is a publicity stunt to make the people think he really is a 'people's man'. Poll says he quits? He quits and hires his yes-man. Poll says he stays? He stays for 2-3 months and then hires his yes-man
[ + ] x0x7
[ - ] x0x7 0 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 11:11:05 ago (+0/-0)
Elon just gave them a sense of winning in a sport called hate Elon. Does he think people are going to play that sport less if they have a sense that they are good at it and it and playing it has given them a feeling of accomplishment?
[ + ] DoctorK
[ - ] DoctorK 4 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 10:58:46 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] GoldenAgeWhen
[ - ] GoldenAgeWhen 1 point 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 11:52:05 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Doglegwarrior
[ - ] Doglegwarrior 1 point 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 12:34:50 ago (+1/-0)
Weighted voting system
1. 1 to 100 vote power
I don't know exactly how to weigh the system but at 18 you get 1 vote.
As you get older and wiser you get one more vote power per year
Married get 2 more vote power 1 more vote power per kid
For the liberal retards there can be test to take to show you have a grasp of the system and are educated in history and goverment philosophy etc this can increase your voting power.
If you are a felon you go back to 1 voting power
Welfare you have zero voting power
I am sure a somewhat fair system can be made but right now a family man with a business providing jobs and paying tons of taxes should have more voting power then a welfare crack whore with 7 kids who is a drain on the system and who votes for more welfare each year
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 3 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 13:11:36 ago (+3/-0)
This will benefit the asians, arabs and nigs
[ + ] GoldenAgeWhen
[ - ] GoldenAgeWhen 0 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 14:55:40 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Sector7
[ - ] Sector7 1 point 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 14:34:39 ago (+1/-0)
A shabbos goy doing all he can to financially support jewish supremacy, and helping others support jewish supremacy too.
Taxpayers are responsible for all that is wrong with our world. 'Modern society' literally would not exist without them.
[ + ] RobertJHarsh
[ - ] RobertJHarsh 1 point 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 16:47:12 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] GoldenAgeWhen
[ - ] GoldenAgeWhen 0 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 15:04:27 ago (+0/-0)
after that you take the log, so if you paid exactly $10 in net taxes that would be a power of 1, $100 = 2, $1000 = 3 ....
So normal people paying $10k would get 4, and very wealthy paying $1M would get 6.
Anyway, it will never happen until we rebuild society, and that will take a bit of strife.
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 2 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 12:48:38 ago (+2/-0)
But even in pretend world, the implication of this move is anathema to the principles he stated going in, i.e. free speech. Free speech is not preserved by democracy.
Free speech is preserved violently, not amicably. It is preserved against our natures, not by them. The amicable solution means 51% get to determine what happens at the expense of the other 49%. "The people", in itself, is a group of mostly scared idiots. They want a story. They'll give up their freedom to the first bidder who sells them the right story.
Free speech is included in a larger notion of freedom, which most people don't actually want. They have to be forced to accept it.
You don't get it by letting the crowd decide by mass appeal.
[ + ] rhy
[ - ] rhy 1 point 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 13:14:17 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] AmalekTheZOG
[ - ] AmalekTheZOG 1 point 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 12:00:01 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Version6
[ - ] Version6 1 point 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 11:41:00 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Fascinus
[ - ] Fascinus 0 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 15:38:31 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] x0x7
[ - ] x0x7 0 points 2.4 yearsDec 19, 2022 10:58:39 ago (+0/-0)
My guess is he realized that he owns many companies but can only be CEO of so many and that it would make more sense to not waste his time on twitter wars, both damaging his investment, the health of other companies he owns, and creating more of an uphill battle for free speech initiatives than is necessary. But this is not how you announce the transition.
He needs to put in a proper free speech ideologue that is well known and has no other reputation to be damaged. "You mean you are going to allow..." Yes. You can't even act shocked because their philosophy is well known.