The word on the street is that the boss (who says he's the law) currently isn't interested in other's opinions on his decisions.
If I was still at Twitter (by my own decision, ie not visa, etc), I would just enjoy the ride and see where it goes instead of trying to save the product and oppose Elon.
Elon is Elon. If he was too interested in other people's opinions, he wouldn't be where he is. That applies basically to all successful CEOs. Nonetheless he currently has a Teitter poll up if he should step down as a head of Twitter (and the majority voted Yes) and says he will do it if yes wins. Soooo...
Worth remembering that it also applies to all(or most) unsuccessful CEOs too, and there are a lot more of those.
>>Nonetheless he currently has a Teitter poll up if he should step down as a head of Twitter (and the majority voted Yes) and says he will do it if yes wins
I personally hope the poll votes NO, purely to make him stick with it and continue this circus for a while longer without an easy excuse of "the poll voted yes so I'm resigning". I'm seeing plenty of articles already claiming he will appoint a new CEO within the next 24 hours though.
That's implying that the doesn't want the poll to vote yes, and I don't think that's true. There are already journalists claiming that he has a new CEO in mind and was going to step down within the next day or two because of how much shitshow this is - a twitter poll is a perfect easy excuse "hey guys I really didn't want to step down but you voted yes so I'm doing it, look how great and honest I am, keeping my word".
Yes I know, but that's why the comment above was so bad. Claiming that "it's all rigged anyway" with no proof is not a useful way to add to a discussion. You can make such a comment on every single topic. Just claim it's rigged because who knows, you don't like the person or you think he's bad or you have a gut feeling you want to share.
It doesn't matter if the polls are "rigged" as the demographic of "currently active Twitter users who follow @elonmusk" is not a representative sampling of all Twitter users. Many people who dislike him have him blocked, people who follow him most likely agree with him at least to some extent.
Note how when he suspended various journalists for posting screenshots of the Elonjet account after he changed the ToS on a whim, he first posted a 5 minute poll asking when they should be unsuspended with "now" being the result with the most votes, then deleted it and redid it with a 24 hour duration and just the options "now" (effectively meaning "tomorrow" as it would not be acted upon before the 24 hours were up) and "in 7 days". The poll again ended with "now" winning (by an even bigger margin). He obviously expected the original poll to go in his favor (after all, 5 minutes means it will mostly reach his direct followers and not have as much of a chance to exit his bubble). He even phrased the question in the most misleading way possible, referring to the accounts as having "doxxed my location in real-time" (again: this referred to posting screenshots with Elonjet's Mastodon account handle being visible).
Pretending this is in any way democratic or representative decision-making is absurd. Even when he reinstated various suspended far-right accounts (note that far-left accounts remain banned and he has since banned other far-left and even moderately left-wing accounts for less) he stated he would not reinstate Alex Jones for entirely personal reasons.
It doesn't matter if the polls are "rigged". They're not representative, they're not democratic and he doesn't care (nor is he legally required to). Calling them "rigged" is a distraction at best and normalizing the anti-democratic conspiracy theories about "rigged elections" at worst.
As a cynic, I agree with the anonymous quote in that article:
> "His investors are surely looking at this now and questioning whether he was the right horse to back. I imagine he's getting pressure from investors to step down and is using this poll to make it look like he's following the will of the people instead of the will of those paying his bills."
"Changpeng Zhao is thought to be one of Twitter's investors and said in May he had backed Mr Musk taking over by making a $500m investment."
I didn't see his name in the court documents. He must have been on the Tesla emails which coule not be used because of an undocumented Tesla policy giving Musks email special privacy rights.
The guy who slandered a rescuer as a pedophile because his nonsense idea of building a special submarine to rescue kids from a cave was snubbed is not "too interested in other people's opinions"?
The guy who claims degrees in fields that never existed at a university he never studied at is not "too interested in other people's opinions"?
The guy who made sure to add a clause in his separation agreement with PayPal that required PayPal to list him as a founder despite having made no meaningful contribution is not "too interested in other people's opinions"?
The guy who gave himself the title "Chief Engineer" at his own company SpaceX despite having no credentials or other qualifications in aerospace engineering is not "too interested in other people's opinions"?
The guy who replied to a random person's tweet about him being booed at a Dave Chapelle standup show to insist that it was actually 90% cheers and 10% boos except for the quiet parts, deleted that reply and then still insisted that he was only booed because the crowd consisted of woke SF leftists (who famously dislike Chapelle due to his recent history of mocking trans people) is not "too interested in other people's opinions"?
The guy who fired the entire communications department of Twitter so all requests for comment would have to go to him just like with his other companies is not "too interested in other people's opinions"?
The guy who slept on the factory floor at Tesla likely contributing nothing whatsoever by doing so is not "too interested in other people's opinions"?
The guy who became Twitter famous for pumping dogecoin, sharing other people's memes without attribution and trying to incorporate the numbers 420 and 69 into anything he can is not "too interested in other people's opinions"?
The guy who went through multiple chaotic rounds of layoffs after buying Twitter, regulations and local labor laws be damned, even going so far as to make the remaining employees virtually sign multiple "pledges" to do what he says is not "too interested in other people's opinions"?
I'm sorry to say, but based on his actions alone Elon Musk is one of the most insecure and fragile individuals on Earth and seeks constant reaffirmation by surrounding himself with yes-men and wielding whatever power he can get his hands on to shield himself from being subjected to any criticism.
But you're right in that he wouldn't be where he is if he were any different. His Twitter buyout literally started as a "meme" and blew up spectacularly because of his utter disregard for the law (or specifically in this case: contract law). He's used to get by by presenting himself as "real-life Tony Stark" and people are increasingly waking up to the fact that he actually is neither an actual engineer nor even remotely as business-savvy as everyone used to believe. Peter Thiel once called him a con artist and no matter what one may think about Thiel this description seems increasingly apt.
If I was still at Twitter (by my own decision, ie not visa, etc), I would just enjoy the ride and see where it goes instead of trying to save the product and oppose Elon.