Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elon has decided not to join our board

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 542 posts

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#291

Post by psyc »

dalbasal wrote: post #272
mike_d wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no agreement on terms. As a member of the board you are required by law to always do and say what is in the best interests of the company and its shareholders. Someone probably sat him down and explained that he doesn't hold a majority of voting shares at Twitter, and that the company and other investors wouldn't put up with his shit. With a 75% majority, the other shareholders could vote to nullify his shar…

At least in online forums, people seem to think "fiduciary duties" are much stricter than they actually are. It's as if CEOs are dragged into a fiduciary court and forced to justify raising salaries, lowering prices or whatnot. Irl, fiduciary duty is more about not stealing or cheating shareholders. There isn't a whole lot of legal activity where officers are sued for grey area fiduciary violations.

Sometimes I think the tropey things forumgoers believe were all established long ago on Something Awful and Fark.

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#292

Post by nullc »

bArray wrote: post #248

So many people are freaking out over Elon Musk's involvement in Twitter, but it's really not a big deal: 1. 10% is not enough to force the CEO to force the developers to implement obviously bad functionality. An edit button is a sensible thing, a button to delete the tweets of other people is obviously a bad thing. They aren't going to drop the 'w' from Twitter just because he says so. Get a grip on reality. 2. The s…

The whole country is second order twitter users due to the popular media relying on it extensively as the source of significant amounts of their "reporting".

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#293

Post by ehnto »

smt88 wrote: post #201
fastball wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Musk's ideas about free speech extend to allowing unfettered botting.

How can anyone tell the difference between a fascist disinformation network and a sincere idiot?

Well, one has a social security number. Just look at all the information Facebook takes from people, requiring a government issued credential to verify your account isn't even farfetched anymore.

Many governments have been rolling out SSO for their suite of digital service applications, I can totally imagine an "internet passport" type situation in the future, where a government issued SSO authorization can be used by social media companies.

For the record, I'm wholeheartedly against that kind of thing, but it's hardly beyond the pale for the companies in question I think.

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#294

Post by makeitdouble »

polski-g wrote: post #275
makeitdouble wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Had the same thought, and looking at the SEC guideline, it seems 13D is the comprehensive one to be used by default, and 13G can only be filed under specific circumstances. At Elon’s level, it feels a lot more malicious than “oops, wrong form” https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/investing-ba...

Elon is 100% not filing anything. His time is too valuable to be doing TPS reports. His attorney would have done it.

While Elon's not typing the forms on the SEC website, I can't imagine his attorneys deciding by themselves how and when they will file to the SEC, when there are further consequences down the line.

Elon has always been in hot waters with the SEC and should have all the attorneys in the world making sure all Is are doted and Ts crossed. I'd think we're in a reverse Hanlon's razor situation: don't assume incompetence when it can readily be assumed to be malice.

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#295

Post by mcbain »

alphabettsy wrote: post #82
axg11 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you said is true but there is an alternative perspective: Elon founded two of the most successful companies in existence. Both companies heavily innovated on hard technological problems in order to achieve commercial success. Hence, he's an operator with experience solving difficult challenges, making him qualified for the board seat.

Elon was not a founder of Tesla. Assuming that was one of the two you were referring to, not that it matters much?

And he wasn't really a founder of PayPal, although that's a bit less clear cut.

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#296

Post by Hallucinaut »

whiplash451 wrote: post #262
chmod600 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it humerous (intentional?) that you say he's a narcissist with no self reflection. Narcissus fell in love with his own reflection: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissus_(mythology)

There was reflection but little reflexion.

I have a bone to pick with the misspelling of humorous too

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#297

Post by mlindner »

andreyk wrote: post #121

So amusing. If you haven't seen some of Elon Musk's antics leading up to this, you really should: Today - [image] 'In all fairness your honor, my client was in "goblin mode"' https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1513244730720616448 Yesterday: "Everyone who signs up for Twitter Blue (ie pays $3/month) should get an authentication checkmark" https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1512946176244473863 [poll] "Delete the w in…

All those posts you mentioned have been deleted though.

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#298

Post by nullc »

ipaddr wrote: post #158
twblalock wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that they weren’t running for the hills says a lot about their leadership. None of that matters compared to the fact that he is the largest shareholder.

Curious why 9% matters when 50%+ is required.

https://homepages.warwick.ac.uk/~ecaae/

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#299

Post by thebeastie »

axg11 wrote: post #9

A very odd set of events and no explanation regarding Elon's change of mind. A pessimist would think that Elon has decided to go for a "hostile" takeover since he is no longer bound by the percentage holding cap. An optimistic would think that Elon had enough self-awareness to realize it would be an overall distraction for Twitter with little benefit. It amuses me more than it should that the CEO of Twitter has poste…

He seems to be playing with fire, they could ban him and that would seriously damage him.

Re: Elon has decided not to join our board

#300

Post by otterley »

coolso wrote: post #224
andreyk wrote: post #121

So amusing. If you haven't seen some of Elon Musk's antics leading up to this, you really should: Today - [image] 'In all fairness your honor, my client was in "goblin mode"' https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1513244730720616448 Yesterday: "Everyone who signs up for Twitter Blue (ie pays $3/month) should get an authentication checkmark" https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1512946176244473863 [poll] "Delete the w in…

> jesus christ is he immature This seems to be the #1 complaint about him. Honestly, so what? Since when is Twitter serious business? To take it a step further... why does life have to always be serious business? There's plenty enough of that as it is. I think it's telling that people are up in arms and furious that Elon Musk might... bring back a little free speech and equal moderation to Twitter? I mean the threat…

Character matters a lot. Our leaders should be moral as well as financial leaders.

As for the president, you give that position way too much credit (or, inversely, blame). They have no authority or control over gas prices, supply chain issues, or autocrats invading other countries. They’re not God; they’re just doing a job described in Article II of the Constitution. Republican or Democrat; it doesn’t matter.

Post reply on HN