[erlich]

> "the president will address congress at 8pm from the rose garden”

"you can’t share the following types of private information, without the permission of the person who it belongs to".

Permission is given.

> “elon is at the chapelle show”

This is an interesting one. Should celebrity sightings be allowed. And what is the difference between going on stage, and be attending a show.

> it is not something most people should agree with

I mean personally though - you would right?

The only thing I can see people disagree on is an exception for famous people.

But I don't know anyone who would say: "this policy is bad because I want people to be able to track me...even if I don't give them permission".

[DiNovi]

it makes going live on the street and asking a stranger a question bannable too. you’re also posting some rule’s that weren’t present at the time of my reply, which implies to me you’re actually just arguing in bad faith and you’re really just one of those elon nerds

[erlich]

> you’re also posting some rule’s that weren’t present at the time of my reply

A lot of the time in online discussions there is always grey area. You can never be 100% right. Except for the precious few, like this one. And it is even better when the person accuses you of arguing in bad faith, and using an ad-hominem attack, at the same time they are completely wrong.

Click the link in the OP. It's literally a diff of the rule change - which you didn't read. LMAO.

It's ironic how it turns out it is you who is not arguing in good faith. You are but one of many though so don't beat yourself up too much about it.