[pfraze]

As a libertarian, how am I supposed to believe in the authenticity and neutrality of the network that Musk is operating when he openly supports a specific political ideology with his public actions? He shows no dedication to neutrality in his statements, so why should I believe he shows it with his decisions?

If the measure of a high standard is the number of people impacted, how many people would you say are affected by Musk, or the other private owners of social networks?

[chjj]

You're a libertarian, but you have issues with someone holding their own political opinions. Interesting combination.

[pfraze]

I have a problem with someone imposing their political opinions on others by buying the means of publishing and communication. You don’t?

[bilvar]

He is not imposing anything on anyone. He has the same right to express his opinions as anybody else has, and his platform clearly allows everyone else to do the same - in contrast with what the previous executives of Twitter did.

That sounds a lot like copium to justify an authoritarian action by the state because it benefits you personally.

[UberFly]

> He shows no dedication to neutrality in his statements

How about his actions? He's been miles more democratic than the previous owners of Twitter.