Which is fine. I block plenty of people. I also mute people, because a block carries a message. And if I found myself in role that gets considerable scrutiny, I'd probably reevaluate my entire approach to social media.
I agree blocking people is fine and should be stigma free. But Mr. Tan's framing of his reasons for blocking seems at odds with the visible pattern. Fair enough; feel free to block me just because you're tired of my bullshit.
I don't particularly care that I triggered his Twitter blocking scripts. But I do take it as a sign that he wants to send a signal to founders looking to raise from his firm that they'd do well to support his political views or stay quiet on social media.
Ok come on, a tax on gross receipts is asinine. Of course low margin businesses with high volumes left. Square left, Stripe left, PayPal left. That cuts into the tax base which in turn means less revenue to help the homeless.
Regardless of whether you think what they did with it was good, the actual calculus of who has to pay how much makes zero sense.
Then of course there's the fact that money went to putting the hobos under highway overpasses in tent cities instead of building more houses.
I'm with Garry on this one.
Bonus points for saying “hobo”!
[1] https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/SF-Citi-video-plugs-...
Now, look, Graham blocked me on these grounds, so I'm not thrilled to say that I think he's completely right about this. I block people I haven't interacted with all the time. Not everybody on twitter is a good actor there, even if they're nice people in other contexts, and it makes life easier to kick some of those people to the curb before they're even aware you exist.
I probably said something tendentious or snarky or unfair or maybe even mean and I might have blocked somebody for the same thing, were the shoe on the other foot.