[foldr]

>Musk has already retracted his claim[1] that he's a "free speech absolutist

The article you link shows that his subsequent actions are inconsistent with that claim, but not that he's 'retracted' it.

Musk has repeatedly said that Twitter will allow 'all legal speech'. There's nothing illegal about sharing links to this document in most jurisdictions (certainly not in the US).

[jonathanyc]

I don’t think you and I disagree! I agree that Musk is being a hypocrite and that his actions are inconsistent both with (1) being a ‘free speech absolutist’ and with (2) allowing all legal speech.

But (2) is definitely not (1). He used to say he supported (1), now he says (2). I guess you could say that that isn’t retraction, and that he still claims he’s a free speech absolutist, but as much as I think he’s a hypocrite I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and allow him to change his mind.

It’s also legal to post flight tracker information, but Musk opposes that in contradiction to (2) as well. That’s also incredibly hypocritical.

I get the feeling you and many others didn’t finish reading my comment before concluding that I’m an Elon Musk fan when in fact I’m the opposite :P I’m guessing people stopped around the first quote, before I point out that what he’s doing here is also hypocritical: blocking documents on JD Vance while having been vocally against blocking documents on Hunter Biden.

Such is HN!

[foldr]

I think the main issue that people took with your original comment is just that it makes a false claim (the 'retraction').

Even if we accept the alleged retraction, it doesn't really make sense in this context to say that it's unfair to come after Musk for saying (1) because he's subsequently said (2), given that (2) is equally inconsistent with banning posts sharing this dossier.

[jonathanyc]

I mean, I'll accept your interpretation with as much charity as I take Musk's public statements, even though I think both are wrong :) Hope to chat again in a happier context!