zlacker

>>prawn+(OP)
The wave of bans from the muskjet thing has been quite dramatic.

It'll be interesting to see if the people who've been lauding musk for his supposedly pro free speech attitudes will reckon with what's been happening in actuality, or if they'll just accept this as "freedom for me but not for thee".

>>c54+C6
I think he was legit shaken by the incident with the kook stalker and his son. Which is certainly understandable. People need to dial the hate way down. Way, way down.

And the rule change was quite clear that linking to the jet tracking was prohibited.

That all said, he's gone too far here. And it's an unwinnable fight anyway.

>>Tigeri+P8
So what would banning a jet tracking account have to do with a stalker (for which no police report was filed)? And why ban journalists? In addition, the rule change was just to enable the banning of the jet tracking, not because it was it came from some higher sense of duty.

>>x86_64+Q9
> So what would banning a jet tracking account have to do with a stalker

From what I can gather and infer, a couple of days ago Musk's son got off the jet and into a car, then that car was attacked by a stalker looking for Musk himself. Musk believes that the stalker got the information from the ElonJet Twitter account.

>>Ukv+9d
It was days after and nowhere near the airport. And again, no police report filed. You were dooped.

>>xcrunn+pg
> It was days after and nowhere near the airport.

> [Other comment:] days after. so by musk's own rules.. fine to post. wasn't real time.

Location of the jet was shared in real-time to my understanding, checking with the link given on https://grndcntrl.net/falconlanding/

> And again, no police report filed. You were dooped.

I see a video of the supposed stalker in a balaclava. I do think Musk took the opportunity to get rid of something he already disliked, but I don't yet believe he faked the attack if that's what you're implying.