• @RagingSnarkasm
    link
    1013 months ago

    Don’t call it anything. Ignore it and maybe it will go away.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    823 months ago

    I mean, it’s not like twitter was ever a beacon of glory, pre-Elon twitter was still twitter

    • @cm0002
      link
      17
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Ok well maybe a beacon of glory is a bit out there for Twitter, but there was a time where it was actually cool and unique.

      Like back in the day where you could interact with it over plain SMS lol

      I feel old.

      • @MrQuallzin
        link
        43 months ago

        My poor parents phone bill when I started using Twitter over SMS…

        • @PunnyName
          link
          3
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          At least 4 years. I was using a flip phone until around 2010, and that’s how I’d normally use Twitter when I wasn’t at a computer.

      • billwashere
        link
        English
        43 months ago

        Ummm … how?!? I just copied that text and it worked. 🤯

        • Fonzie!
          link
          fedilink
          93 months ago

          Because it’s text.

          There are more kind of letters then just our latin alphabet. Cyrillic, aboriginal Canadian and even Chinese and Japanese can be typed by just text for instance (日本語の例え)

          In the same vein, mathematical and other scientific symbols can be typed using just text, and 𝕏 is the symbol that stands in place for arbitrary distance in a formula.

          Basically, it’s just a (mathematical) letter, it can be typed.
          That’s also why their new CEO had difficulties copyrighting it; it’s just a letter, after all!

          • Fonzie!
            link
            fedilink
            173 months ago

            As a sidenote, looking up what the mathematical symbol actually means gave me this gem

            𝕏 redirects here, for the social media, see Twitter

            Even the Wikipedia community refuses to acknowledge this!

              • Fonzie!
                link
                fedilink
                22 months ago

                There is no concencus, slightly more people oppose to rename the page, but only sightly.

                I hope they keep it up, to avoid confusion, and to spite their current, dickhead CEO

  • @Surp
    link
    323 months ago

    Sorry twitter was always trash

    • @_stranger_
      link
      83 months ago

      It really is saying something that it’s waaay worse now.

  • @mogranja
    link
    293 months ago

    There is simple solution: just ignore it. Don’t refer to it in any way.

  • @EndOfLine
    link
    English
    283 months ago

    It’s not like it was a hostile take over. They played their part when Musk talked shit and they sued him to follow through with the purchase. They could have easily kept it, but they wanted the money instead.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      103 months ago

      Not that they are blameless - far from it - but they had a fiduciary responsibility to pursue the deal because it was good for their shareholders

      • db0
        link
        fedilink
        93 months ago

        “Fiduciary duty to get profit” is a libertarian myth. It has no legal basis.

        • @jaycifer
          link
          43 months ago

          It’s a myth so widely pushed and accepted over the decades that just calling it a myth won’t be accepted as an argument against it at this point.

          What I think is interesting is that this sense of fiduciary duty can be used by a company to do whatever they want. Mass layoffs are part of a fiduciary duty to cut costs. Mass hirings are part of a fiduciary duty to expand operations for growth. At this point it’s less a myth and more an excuse for doing whatever.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          13 months ago

          No, I don’t think that’s true. Twitters board had to sue for specific performance because Musk backed out of a formal offer in the late stages for fabricated reasons. It’s not like it was “sue musk or go to jail” but their job as board members comes with a fiduciary obligation, and musk was paying 38% over the share price. Twitter is FAR from blameless but sueing musk isn’t a failing https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2022/07/14/twitter-vs-musk-the-complaint/

          • db0
            link
            fedilink
            23 months ago

            That’s not what I said. I said the “Fiduciary duty to make profit” that keeps being brought up whenever corpos act like sociopaths, is a myth.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              03 months ago

              Ok? But that’s not what the Twitter board claimed. I agree with your premise but that isn’t what happened here.

              • db0
                link
                fedilink
                33 months ago

                You literally used it as the reason in the comment I replied to

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  33 months ago

                  But they literally HAVE a fiduciary obligation. I agree with you that people use that as an excuse for heinous shit, but in this case they had a formal, legally binding offer. Musk was in breach of contract and they sued for specific performance or damages. Musk didn’t want to pay the damages. If they didn’t sue, Twitter would forfeit I think $1bn in damages and their stock would tank. Not suing would open the door for hostile investors to come in, pretend to buy, back out when they wanted to and time the stock movements. I get what you’re saying, but this is a case where if the board didn’t sue then Twitters shareholders pay for it.

                  You and I may agree that they never should have been in that place to begin with but that’s definitionally a fiduciary obligation

    • @Lost_My_Mind
      link
      63 months ago

      Twitter has never, even dating back to it’s inception, never ever ever turned a profit. The whole reason Elon mockingly offered to buy it was because they were looking for, and struggling to find, a buyer. They just wanted to break even and walk away.

      Instead Elon was like “Hur dur I got 43 billion for ya!” And Twitter was like “SOLD! No takesies backsies!”. And Elon was like “Wait, wut?”

      And then Elon carried a sink through the lobby in protest.

    • Madrigal
      link
      English
      53 months ago

      OP might be talking about the user base, not the owners.

    • @kevindqc
      link
      53 months ago

      It was a public company, the shareholders would’ve sued them, no?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    263 months ago

    Hey, don’t rewrite history - twitter was always notoriously bad, under Elon it surely got even worse though.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -103 months ago

      I agree with everything except the “got even worse” part. It was always a steaming turd.

      • @Ultraviolet
        link
        English
        113 months ago

        It was, but now it’s a steaming turd with Nazis and KKK apologists.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -23 months ago

          A few Nazis and KKK apologists convinced a shit-ton of marketers, influencers, Karens, and other predatory users to leave.

          On balance, Nazis and Klukkers didn’t make it any worse than it was.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    213 months ago

    For me, it’s simpler than that: I’m gonna deadname his company as long as he keeps deadnaming his daughter

    • @PunnyName
      link
      73 months ago

      Not really. It was fun to talk to people that you barely knew. It was kinda like a hybrid of a chatroom and a forum.

      But it grew to become shit.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 months ago

        The reality is that Xitter isn’t actually any shittier than Twitter was. It’s not any better, of course. But it’s certainly not any worse.

  • Rayquetzalcoatl
    link
    English
    163 months ago

    I don’t understand why anyone would care this much about a social media website

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 months ago

      They don’t. Rather, they believe that others do, so posts like this are simply signaling alliance.

  • Ech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    123 months ago

    Those people sold it to musk. They were tech bros whose goal from the start was to get a massive buyout and bail. They don’t deserve your respect anymore than musk does.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    The way I look at it, if Elon Musk is gonna deadname his own child, I’m sure as shit gonna deadname the corporation he tanked

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      73 months ago

      The following is a tremendously disproportionate analogy given that we’re talking about a microblogging website, but I really don’t think there’s any better term for it:

      It’s really less like you’re calling Twitter by its deadname and more like you’re refusing to call it by its slave name. Twitter didn’t come up with this on its own, some guy just rolled up and said “I’m changing your name because yours isn’t cool enough.” Like, fukken Kunta Kinte.

      Again, very unfortunate that that’s the only comparison that comes to mind but I’m really blanking on anything else. Jean Valjean, I guess. Maybe Darth Vader. Locutus of Borg.

  • @fubo
    link
    113 months ago

    Previously, it was a shithole.
    Now, it’s a Nazi shithole.