[LittleShaman]

The second point is just confused. It isn't about if people would do it, it's on if Musk should be doing it. His antics include boosting misinformation like vaccine skepticism and fringe political theories, that's obviously wrong and worth criticizing.

[Dalewyn]

From the perspective of Musk doing whatever he wants with his money: It's his money, it's none of our business what he does with it. If someone has a problem, he can compete against Musk in getting the deal instead.

From the perspective of free speech and expression: He and everyone should be able to speak whatever he and they so desires.

This is the United States of America, not Russia or China. Even if you argue it's merely ostensibly, we espouse freedom around here.

[LittleShaman]

It very much is our problem what he does with/on Twitter because it affects us, it's one of the largest social media platforms, it's not a new yacht he bought.

One of the valuable aspects of freedom of speech is ideas can gain traction because of their virtue and not e.g because of force. Musk has no expertise in most of what he talks about. Yet he uses reach he has purely because of his wealth to spread misinformation. The marketplace of ideas is a complete joke if ideas spread just because of money.

[postpawl]

The argument is basically if a billionaire can afford to do it then it’s ok. It’s more than confused, it’s crazy.