Why is Twitter trying so hard to prevent Elon Musk from taking it over?

[Substatic 421]

1 hour ago, Ramza said:

I've already told you it goes beyond the science, both vaccines mandates and climate changes are both hot policy making issues and are being pushed as such. 

 

Yeah but that's not what they flagged. The math books didn't talk about climate policy or mandates. 

 

What triggered her were passaged that said climate change is real. Which is true. Imagine a school book not being allowed to teach facts lol.

 

1 hour ago, Ramza said:

 

 

You know how a sensitive topic like KKK can be 

 

So lets ban KKK History books!   🤣

[Mr. Impossible 407]

1 hour ago, Ramza said:

The term groomers is only used for adults trying to enforce their woke doctrines unto easily impressionable children. No one use groomer in the sense that this person is simply pro gay/trans rights. It's the indoctrination that is the issue, which I don't think should be imposed on children of a young age who has yet to develop their sexuality maturity in the first place.

 

Once again, you just prove how ignorant you are. You don't even know what we're talking about.

 

Lol you're so full of shit. 

[Mr. House 3,371]

29 minutes ago, Mr. Impossible said:

 

Lol you're so full of shit. 

Great rebuttal. 

[Twinblade★ 3,907]

It’s being reported that half of Biden’s 22 million followers are bots/inactive accounts. 
 
This is why the deal was put on hold. It seems very likely that more than 5% of Twitter users are bots. If that’s the case then Musk is very much entitled to re-negotiate the deal considering that the original terms were not accurate.

[Mr. House 3,371]

47 minutes ago, Substatic said:

 

Yeah but that's not what they flagged. The math books didn't talk about climate policy or mandates. 

 

What triggered her were passaged that said climate change is real. Which is true. Imagine a school book not being allowed to teach facts lol.

 

 

So lets ban KKK History books!   🤣

You're over simplifying everything.

 

As I've said, if KKK history is being purposefully taught in a bad manner it can actually be dangerous. It holds true on both side of the spectrums, you wouldn't agree if teachers started to portray them in a good light and I don't agree with using KKK as a example of enforcing the woke ideology of systematic oppression in America.

 

Unfortunately, we are at a point where we can't trust teachers to be unbias or to teach the science they are supposed to teach. Otherwise I would be with you, I find no pleasure in seeing books being banned for political reasons. 

[Mr. Impossible 407]

5 minutes ago, Ramza said:

Great rebuttal. 

Lol rebuttal to bullshit? "Grooming is widely used as an adult attempting to coerce younger people, usually kids into sexual activities with themselves or other adults. We all know this but now as a dodge you're trying to claim it's" only about wokism". 

 

Like you typed that bullshit and thought you made a valid point. Lol by this retarded definition all adults are groomers. Oh wait, you made it only about "woke" politics... You're so clever! 

 

Eat shit lol 

[Mr. House 3,371]

3 minutes ago, Twinblade said:

It’s being reported that half of Biden’s 22 million followers are bots/inactive accounts. 
 
This is why the deal was put on hold. It seems very likely that more than 5% of Twitter users are bots. If that’s the case then Musk is very much entitled to re-negotiate the deal considering that the original terms were not accurate.

The other day I was reading a post, it was so incoherent and logically flawed that I was sure it was just another bot, turned out it was actually a human going by the alias of Liquid Pampers. 

[Mr. House 3,371]

1 minute ago, Mr. Impossible said:

Lol rebuttal to bullshit? "Grooming is widely used as an adult attempting to coerce younger people, usually kids into sexual activities with themselves or other adults. We all know this but now as a dodge you're trying to claim it's" only about wokism". 

 

Like you typed that bullshit and thought you made a valid point. Lol by this retarded definition all adults are groomers. Oh wait, you made it only about "woke" politics... You're so clever! 

 

Eat shit lol 

That's how the term is used to these day and this is what I meant by groomers, that purple hair lady/guy enforcing their gender fluid ideology on children in a class that has nothing to do with that in the first place.

 

There's a huge difference between teaching existential facts to children such as, to have a babies you need to have a man and a woman make love compared to telling children that their gender is fluid and they can choose whatever they want to be on any given day at the age of 7, that a man can get pregnant and that if anyone tell them otherwise, they can just go to their safe space and block their ears. It's education vs ideological indoctrination.

 

So no, not all adults are groomers. 

[Mr. Impossible 407]

15 minutes ago, Ramza said:

That's how the term is used to these day and this is what I meant by groomers, that purple hair lady/guy enforcing their gender fluid ideology on children in a class that has nothing to do with that in the first place.

 

There's a huge difference between teaching existential facts to children such as, to have a babies you need to have a man and a woman make love compared to telling children that their gender is fluid and they can choose whatever they want to be on any given day at the age of 7, that a man can get pregnant and that if anyone tell them otherwise, they can just go to their safe space and block their ears. It's education vs ideological indoctrination.

 

So no, not all adults are groomers. 

Lol OK, so you're using it in the intellectually dishonest alt right way. Got it. 

 

It's funny how you guys whine about context one minute to defend right wing propaganda while completing avoiding it when talking about "woke" issues. 

[Mr. House 3,371]

59 minutes ago, Mr. Impossible said:

Lol OK, so you're using it in the intellectually dishonest alt right way. Got it. 

 

It's funny how you guys whine about context one minute to defend right wing propaganda while completing avoiding it when talking about "woke" issues. 

It's so dishonest for me to use a term wrongly when it serves me no ulterior motive or purpose whatsoever. Are you retarded or just grasping at straws here?

 

If that makes you happy I can keep referring to them as the gender confused, well adjusted, purple hair adults. It's not my fault the term groomer has been coined recently to describe those type of people, I didn't start it. Regardless, the term serves no purpose other than to indicate the specific group of people I was talking about.

 

What is the context missing here exactly? Are you denying there are actually people out there that act like this in schools or even as parents? Please go ahead, there's enough footage from Libs of TikTok to make a long ass documentary. 

[Mr. Impossible 407]

15 minutes ago, Ramza said:

It's so dishonest for me to use a term wrongly when it serves me no ulterior motive or purpose whatsoever. Are you retarded or just grasping at straws here?

 

If that makes you happy I can keep referring to them as the gender confused, well adjusted, purple hair adults. It's not my fault the term groomer has been coined recently to describe those type of people, I didn't start it. Regardless, the term serves no purpose other than to indicate the specific group of people I was talking about.

 

What is the context missing here exactly? Are you denying there are actually people out there that act like this in schools or even as parents? Please go ahead, there's enough footage from Libs of TikTok to make a long ass documentary. 

This is how I know you made your wife miserable. You are using terms you don't even know but heard used in right wing rhetoric and propaganda, and some how thats on me? Lol would you like an apology? I'm sorry you're ignorant. 

 

You can call them whatever you like. All but admitting that you are just parroting shit you don't understand from other people who also don't know what they are talking about or lying about it is entertaining. 

 

So now you are moving the goal post to any possible amount, even minuscule to try to prove a point? There are teachers, most who are straight, having sex with their students right now. Does this mean all straight teachers are groomers or pedophiles? 

 

You guys play fast and loose with details to the points fail before they even begin. Please, spend like even 5 seconds about the shit you're saying and see if they hold water. Stop letting others do the thinking for you. 

 

 

 

[Mr. House 3,371]

12 minutes ago, Mr. Impossible said:

This is how I know you made your wife miserable. You are using terms you don't even know but heard used in right wing rhetoric and propaganda, and some how thats on me? Lol would you like an apology? I'm sorry you're ignorant. 

 

You can call them whatever you like. All but admitting that you are just parroting shit you don't understand from other people who also don't know what they are talking about or lying about it is entertaining. 

 

So now you are moving the goal post to any possible amount, even minuscule to try to prove a point? There are teachers, most who are straight, having sex with their students right now. Does this mean all straight teachers are groomers or pedophiles? 

 

You guys play fast and loose with details to the points fail before they even begin. Please, spend like even 5 seconds about the shit you're saying and see if they hold water. Stop letting others do the thinking for you. 

 

 

 

It's a term I employ because it makes too much sense. The fact that YOU have issues with a now commonly accepted and used term to describe those people is definitely YOUR problem.

 

The worse part is, you knew exactly what I was talking about  but you had to go on a tangent because you had zero arguments to bring to the table, that's like when people corrects your typos instead of actually bringing forth an argument.

 

So apparently groomers are just a right winged propaganda. Sure, mate. Just like every other issue the right constantly bring a light to. Just propaganda and fake lies. Best believe the side that tells you that men can also get pregnant and can't even describe what a woman is (I'm not a biologist) lol

 

Wtf are you even talking about? Teachers having sex with students? That's just wrong. This is so far removed from what I'm talking about, there's a huge fucking line between woke sex education and actually fucking the kid. Jesus christ. 

Edited May 18, 2022 by Ramza

[Substatic 421]

24 minutes ago, Ramza said:

 

 

So apparently groomers are just a right winged propaganda.  

 

It is. You guys are incorrectly using that term to incorrectly associate actual grooming with anything LGBQT. It's an old trick.

 

PolitiFact | Why it’s not ‘grooming’: What research says about gender and sexuality in schools

Abcarian: 'Groomers' coming for your children? - Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)

'Grooming': The ubiquitous buzzword in LGBTQ school debate | AP News

 

Kind of ironic all things considered,

 

 

Republican Sexual Predators, Abusers, and Enablers Pt. 26

 

 

Edited May 18, 2022 by Substatic

[Mr. Impossible 407]

1 hour ago, Ramza said:

It's a term I employ because it makes too much sense. The fact that YOU have issues with a now commonly accepted and used term to describe those people is definitely YOUR problem.

 

lol Ok professor. Not to be a dick but there are two scenarios. 

 

1. You sat and thought about how perfect the word groomer is to describe older people teaching young children specifically only left wing political ideology. 

 

2. You just heard Marjorie Taylor Greene or Matt Gaetz say it on Fox News or Facebook and started using it like a good little bot.

 

I'm choosing scenario #2. I have no problem with you using it incorrectly. I already think you're an idiot. 

 

Quote

 

The worse part is, you knew exactly what I was talking about  but you had to go on a tangent because you had zero arguments to bring to the table, that's like when people corrects your typos instead of actually bringing forth an argument.

 

To be honest, I thought you knew what Groomer meant. Not that you just saw the word on Twitter and created a convenient definition for the word in your head. So I incorrectly thought you were smarter than you are and I already thought you were an idiot. 

 

Quote

So apparently groomers are just a right winged propaganda. Sure, mate. Just like every other issue the right constantly bring a light to. Just propaganda and fake lies. Best believe the side that tells you that men can also get pregnant and can't even describe what a woman is (I'm not a biologist) lol

 

Are we talking about actual groomers, like Matt Gaetz or your personal definition you made up a couple of hours ago in order to not take an L? 

 

Yes, that is all the right has brought to the table. No healthcare plans, no infrastructure plans, no environmental protection plans, no actual immigration plans. This is why they have to do stupid shit like banning CRT in school districts that had zero intentions on actually teaching it. Guns and abortions are the only topics the right will talk about for more than an election cycle. 

 

Is Fox News still tracking "caravans of invaders" looking to come steal people's summer homes anymore? Are most elected Republicans still afraid to admit the last election was fair and Trump actually lost? No, because upsetting Trump could lead to him complaining about them, which could sink their political careers. Regardless of political affiliation how can anyone believe propaganda is a fallacy when one man make people muddy reality to appease his ego? This is only a few degrees away from thinking NK doesn't engage in propaganda. 

 

Hey remember QANON?

 

You know how millions on the right believe there's an all knowing deity that controls every aspect of our lives and reality and bend the entirety of existence based on our level of worship of him? Even after we die. 

 

Or people who think JFK jr will be Donald Trump's running mate in 2024?  

 

The side that believes in alien lizard vampires who are only democrats or leftist, that eat children to maintain their health even though they're all  elderly and decrepit?  Bad batch of baby blood?

 

Quote

Wtf are you even talking about? Teachers having sex with students? That's just wrong. This is so far removed from what I'm talking about, there's a huge fucking line between woke sex education and actually fucking the kid. Jesus christ. 

 

lol Again, the topic was groomers. This might seem far removed from your made-up bullshit definition. Again, you're dumb and dishonest. My bad some how though. 

 

Edited May 18, 2022 by Mr. Impossible

[Mr. House 3,371]

1 hour ago, Substatic said:

 

It is. You guys are incorrectly using that term to incorrectly associate actual grooming with anything LGBQT. It's an old trick.

 

PolitiFact | Why it’s not ‘grooming’: What research says about gender and sexuality in schools

Abcarian: 'Groomers' coming for your children? - Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)

'Grooming': The ubiquitous buzzword in LGBTQ school debate | AP News

 

Kind of ironic all things considered,

 

 

Republican Sexual Predators, Abusers, and Enablers Pt. 26

 

 

Pushing woke sexuality doctrines unto children, not even teenagers, actual children who can barely ties their shoes together is actually not grooming, or so they say.  

 

You guys are so lost on the definition of the word that you forgot why people started using it in the first place. My god.

 

Of course you won't believe any of it as usual even though there's ample evidences that it's actually taking place. The ''groomers'' came out of the woodwork quite fast when Florida introduced ''don't say gay'' bill. And as usual, the argument was dishonest and most people on the left hadn't even taken the time to understand what the bill said actually believing it said not to say the word gay. lmfao

[Mr. House 3,371]

30 minutes ago, Mr. Impossible said:

 

lol Ok professor. Not to be a dick but there are two scenarios. 

 

1. You sat and thought about how perfect the word groomer is to describe older people teaching young children specifically only left wing political ideology. 

 

2. You just heard Marjorie Taylor Greene or Matt Gaetz say it on Fox News or Facebook and started using it like a good little bot.

 

I'm choosing scenario #2. I have no problem with you using it incorrectly. I already think you're an idiot. 

 

 

To be honest, I thought you knew what Groomer meant. Not that you just saw the word on Twitter and created a convenient definition for the word in your head. So I incorrectly thought you were smarter than you are and I already thought you were an idiot. 

 

 

Are we talking about actual groomers, like Matt Gaetz or your personal definition you made up a couple of hours ago in order to not take an L? 

 

Yes, that is all the right has brought to the table. No healthcare plans, no infrastructure plans, no environmental protection plans, no actual immigration plans. This is why they have to do stupid shit like banning CRT in school districts that had zero intentions on actually teaching it. Guns and abortions are the only topics the right will talk about for more than an election cycle. 

 

Is Fox News still tracking "caravans of invaders" looking to come steal people's summer homes anymore? Are most elected Republicans still afraid to admit the last election was fair and Trump actually lost? No, because upsetting Trump could lead to him complaining about them, which could sink their political careers. Regardless of political affiliation how can anyone believe propaganda is a fallacy when one man make people muddy reality to appease his ego? This is only a few degrees away from thinking NK doesn't engage in propaganda. 

 

Hey remember QANON?

 

You know how millions on the right believe there's an all knowing deity that controls every aspect of our lives and reality and bend the entirety of existence based on our level of worship of him? Even after we die. 

 

Or people who think JFK jr will be Donald Trump's running mate in 2024?  

 

The side that believes in alien lizard vampires who are only democrats or leftist, that eat children to maintain their health even though they're all  elderly and decrepit?  Bad batch of baby blood?

 

 

lol Again, the topic was groomers. This might seem far removed from your made-up bullshit definition. Again, you're dumb and dishonest. My bad some how though. 

 

It's pretty commonly used in media, no need to come up with scenarios on how I came to use that word. It's hardly some controversial word usage and as I said before, you already knew what I meant, not need to play dumb.

 

The word fgt also mean a bundle of sticks bound together for burning but we all know that's not how we use that term 99,99% of the time because it became a different definition over time. Sort of the same thing happening here, at least when spoken in the proper context, it's pretty hard to not understand where I'm going with ''groomer'' here. I'm not going to waste any more of my time on pointless words salad debate any longer. 

 

Not sure why you're turning this into conservative policies as a whole debate, this doesn't change what I said. We can get to all those elements in due time and I would actually love to.

 

Wow, you have a great vision of the right if you think a few crazy lunatics who think 'lizards rule the world' actually represent the party and it's interests. I have yet to see republicans bring forth those arguments in congress. 

 

See, this is the difference right now from the two political sides, the right would never stoop so low as to take what such nut jobs think but the left on the other hand, fully embraced the woke doctrine in all it's insane glory. This is partly why democrats are going to lose the next election.

 

Here's a perfect representation in video form of the left insanity:

 

It's actually missing the best part where she said she can't explain what a woman is because and I quote ''I'm not a biologist''.  That's a judge of the supreme court, what a farce.

 

 

[Mr. Impossible 407]

13 minutes ago, Ramza said:

Pushing woke sexuality doctrines unto children, not even teenagers, actual children who can barely ties their shoes together is actually not grooming, or so they say.  

 

LMFAO this motherfucker is going through all of this because he used a word he admits he didn't understand. Even when you're wrong, you're still right some how. Now he's just gonna keep saying using the word incorrectly to own us soyboys. *chef's kiss*

 

13 minutes ago, Ramza said:

 

You guys are so lost on the definition of the word that you forgot why people started using it in the first place. My god.

 

Actually, that would be you. The reason they are using the term groomers is the same as always. To paint the LGBTQ community as predatory and Republicans love using children to scare their base into action. Except school shootings, guns are actually more important than children. It was and still is a big reason conservatives are against gay adoptions. They spent decades painting potential gay parents as possible groomers or sexual abusers simply because they are gay. 

 

This is what's frustrating about you retards. It's like y'all were born in 2016 or something. None of this shit is new or unique. It's the same repackaged for low information, reactionary idiots to consume every or every other election cycle. The intention is always muddy the water with pedophilia. It's all you guys think about.  

 

13 minutes ago, Ramza said:

Of course you won't believe any of it as usual even though there's ample evidences that it's actually taking place. The ''groomers'' came out of the woodwork quite fast when Florida introduced ''don't say gay'' bill. And as usual, the argument was dishonest and most people on the left hadn't even taken the time to understand what the bill said actually believing it said not to say the word gay. lmfao

 

Yeah, what evidence?

 

[Mr. House 3,371]

4 hours ago, Twinblade said:

It’s being reported that half of Biden’s 22 million followers are bots/inactive accounts. 
 
This is why the deal was put on hold. It seems very likely that more than 5% of Twitter users are bots. If that’s the case then Musk is very much entitled to re-negotiate the deal considering that the original terms were not accurate.

I almost didn't believe it at first.

 

Half of Joe Biden's Twitter followers are fake, audit reveals (nypost.com)

 

Nearly half of President Biden’s 22.2 million Twitter followers are bogus, a new audit revealed.

The audit, which was done for the social media giant by software firm SparkToro, found that 49.3% of the president’s followers are “fake followers,” according to Newsweek.

SparkToro has defined “fake followers” as “accounts that are unreachable and will not see the account’s tweets (either because they’re spam, bots, propaganda, etc. or because they’re no longer active on Twitter).”

[Mr. Impossible 407]

17 minutes ago, Ramza said:

It's pretty commonly used in media, no need to come up with scenarios on how I came to use that word. It's hardly some controversial word usage and as I said before, you already knew what I meant, not need to play dumb.

 

The word fgt also mean a bundle of sticks bound together for burning but we all know that's not how we use that term 99,99% of the time because it became a different definition over time. Sort of the same thing happening here, at least when spoken in the proper context, it's pretty hard to not understand where I'm going with ''groomer'' here. I'm not going to waste any more of my time on pointless words salad debate any longer. 

 

Oh yeah, I do understand. You admitted to not knowing what it meant, and embarrassed that you only know the term because of right wing social media so you created a laughable fiction about you choosing the word because it was soooo good.  We'd have to be as stupid as you to buy this bullshit. 

 

17 minutes ago, Ramza said:

Not sure why you're turning this into conservative policies as a whole debate, this doesn't change what I said. We can get to all those elements in due time and I would actually love to.

 

It' doesn't. What you said is still stupid. I'm no disputing or disproving that. 

 

17 minutes ago, Ramza said:

the right would never stoop so low 

 

 

[Substatic 421]

52 minutes ago, Ramza said:

 

 

You guys are so lost on the definition of the word that you forgot why people started using it in the first place. My god.

 

 

So you're not using it in the pedophile sense that several other Republicans are incorrectly using it in?