zlacker

>>prawn+(OP)
It's interesting that many are debating the value of this 'rule', when this action is blatant abuse of his powers to silence his critics. He has now a lengthy and growing history of this type of behavior, so it was 100% foreseeable. He could just come out and say that its his twitter and he can do what he wants, but no, because he also wants to be seen as a 'defender of free speech'. He acts like a-hole, but then expects unquestioning adoration.

>>Eddy_V+Xv1
Blocking those who want to give the general public up to-the-minute location information on him and his family is "silencing his critics?"

Nothing could be further from the truth.

You have no fundamental right to track Elon Musk, just like I would have no fundamental right to track the whereabouts of you and your family. Disagree? When do you let us attach a tracking device to your conveyance?

Few, if any, would be comfortable having their family movements tracked by the public.

Also, journalist is a bit of a stretch. Journalism died a long time ago. Corporate script-readers at best, and state-run media parrots at worst. Either would be a better description than "journalist."

I remember when that "journalist" from WashPost published the home address of a woman she didn't like. Everyone was all for that...

Now it seems the shoe is on the other foot and the hypocrites don't like it.

>>PM_me_+5B2
> You have no fundamental right to track Elon Musk, just like I would have no fundamental right to track the whereabouts of you and your family. Disagree? When do you let us attach a tracking device to your conveyance?

Nobody's tracking Musk, they're tracking his plane. Further, "they" aren't tracking it, the gov is, and publishing it, as public information.

Everyone lets the same tracker be attached to their conveyance ... WHEN THEY OWN A JET.