I'm pretty serious. You asked a question, I answered it. I'm sorry if you don't like the answer. I don't personally know the full set of people who have asked him for help, but the conversation following the tweet I linked is more than sufficient to prove to you that it was others asking him for help rather than Elon's hubris prompting him to dive into a situation he wasn't welcome at.
It's actually a bit saddening that you are serious. But on the other hand there are people who are doing global politics on Twitter. Usually when you are using the phrase "he has been asked for help" I would imply that he was asked by someone officially responsible for the rescue and not by random people on Twitter. Obviously that hasn't been the case.
> Usually when you are using the phrase "he has been asked for help" I would imply that he was asked by someone officially responsible for the rescue and not by random people on Twitter. Obviously that hasn't been the case.
If you aren't sure exactly who asked him for help, it's good to say that explicitly at the beginning, because saying it with no qualification actually does imply that the asker is someone involved in the situation and not just some rando.
Well for one, you were the one who claimed that he was asked for help, and now don't tell me, like your buddy, that this is true because someone one Twitter did that. For two, if the Thai government had actually asked Elon Musk for help, surely this would have made the news (and also been tweeted on his account).
If you read the above discussion first: this question didn't pop out of the blue. It was a direct response to someone suggesting Elon's hubris got the better of him and made him insert himself into a situation where he wasn't wanted. If you read the Twitter conversation I linked you, it addresses this point pretty directly. It's obvious that he had no plans to insert himself into the situation until someone else (random guy or not, I don't know) nudged him to.
> I did read the discussion first, and my common sense interpretation of the question was whether someone of relevance to the event asked.
Right, so in coming up with that interpretation you completely ignored the rest of the discussion and what the point of this question was. The point was not who the person asking was, or what their credentials were. The point was to figure out whether it was some external or internal force that prompted Elon to help. The status of the person who requested his help does not change whether he was the one who came up with the idea of helping or whether it was someone else who did.
By your logic, I can personally consider myself invited to any party, as long as a random person (even one who has no connection to the party) on Twitter invites me to said party.
That tweet might have motivated me to join the party, and I might even contribute to and be very welcome at that party, but to claim that I was invited to the party because some external force prompted me to go there is not common sense.
> By your logic, I can personally consider myself invited to any party, as long as a random person (even one who has no connection to the party) on Twitter invites me to said party.
Or, you know, you could use try to be more sophisticated in your reasoning and realize it's completely possible and sane to have different criteria when evaluating whether Musk's decision to join a party in response to a stranger's suggestion was an act of hubris compared to when the event in question was an international rescue effort.
Or, you know, you could just admit that the wording was poorly chosen and caused a lot misunderstandings, and that Musk wasn't officially asked for help, but that a random stranger on Twitter asked him to do something.
> Or, you know, you could just admit that the wording was poorly chosen and caused a lot misunderstandings, and that Musk wasn't officially asked for help, but that a random stranger on Twitter asked him to do something.
I would rather not claim more than I know, given that I don't know if he was asked officially.
