To think that if everyone who thinks Elon Musk is a menace boycotted X he would have less power

Also how does Berrell know they “abadoned”
them? They may have done or they maybe making the journey first to send for wives and children once settled.

Are you fact checking anything you see on there or assuming it must be true because it said so in a tweet?

This is a good point. I see X as a flag that random news agency has posted something, and then I go to the source. So yes, X is a gateway. FWIW I don’t click on links, I go directly to the news app. But yes, X acts as a shop window. For now, anyway.

Not been on it, or bluesky

But I have heard enough about its lack of responsibility, and pushing of views to never use X. The problem is it's now an echo chamber and, probably so is Bluesky.

But that's what happens when you aren't committed to balance

I would also add that both storiesides (Afghan refugees in Germany) and Michelle Russell's story have been reported in the press so there's no particular need to get your news from an unreliable source like X, you just choose to.

That top one is an example of why Twitter is a cesspit.

"Dr. Maalouf"'s claim is misleading. It came several days after the German election, which was won by the CSU/CDU block, who have promised to suspend Germany's Afghan Refugee program (and seem set to implement that shortly).

What happened, here, was that one plane of Afghan refugees landed the day after the election, and angry anti-immigration folk spread disinformation that the new government has reneged on its promise (despite the new government not yet having actually been formed). This false claim spread rapidly on X, as is the fashion.

Of those newly-arriving Afghans, more than half were admitted under the program for particularly vulnerable persons (unaccompanied minors, elderly refugees, people with severe physical or mental disabilities, and those who have experienced trauma or persecution based on gender or sexual identity). From the other refugees (those not in the "particularly vulnerable" class), it is true that males are over-represtned, around 30% are females. The male cohort also includes children.

So that response, to the original tweet, which seems to suggest that every single one of the refugees are men that have abandoned their families, is just anti-immigrant rhetoric and not anchored in facts.

I stopped using X after the August 2024 riots and have no intention of returning.

Same. I don’t post any more, personal or business, and I don’t press the like or repost button either. And I block and report as a personal mission. But I do get breaking news there.

I missed out a word. Thats child sex abuse IMAGES I meant to say. I'd like to see an inquiry (or something more useful that doesn't just give too much money to lawyers) into the effects of the sentencing guidelines for paedophilia being softened under Starmer when he was DPP.

THIS is why I like X and why I won't be leaving. The mainstream media doesn't give attention to these 2 topics for example?

Without Twitter I would not be regularly updated of the pitiful sentences that are given out to offending keepers and purveyors of child sexual abuse across the UK.

Formerly Twitter.

What's x?

I've done it. It's shit now he's ruined it, anyway.

He is a menace. He used some of his vast wealth to interfere in the election offering a £1m a day sweepstake in Georgia. He's been given power and access to the public's data the state holds. He has not be elected by the public.

Twitter/X is surely now only populated by dickheads and those who are so detached from real life that the number of followers they have is the way they get their self-esteem (so they can't leave). I don't know anyone personally who is still using it.

I should have left much earlier but finally deactivated my account on Nazi salute day. Switched seamlessly over to Bluesky and haven’t even thought about it since.

They use the words, but have little idea what they mean.

Before Trump undid it, the US (which has a greater degree of free speech than the UK) banned TikTok for national security reasons, with a massive bipartisan majority in the House, and subsequent court approval (even against the backdrop of the First Amendment).

Realistically, that decision was only reversed due to Trump and Musk's personal interests in overturning it, and not for the good of the country (and, given Trump's blacklisting of the Associated Press and clamp-downs on protesting, plainly not out of some sort of ideological free-speech absolutionism).

Clearly, even among the greatest proponents of unlimited free speech, most of them (left or right), do not see an issue with banning platforms that are hostile to the national interest.

So, where's your critical thinking?

I think that on a regular basis about switching the internet off... {sighs wistfully}

This man is an idiot isn’t he.

”Illegal”.

Ha!

What does that have to do with democracy?

He’s worth £400bn odd, he now owns all US personal data, and seems to be the president’s right hand man.

Boycotting X won’t make a blind bit of difference.

In what possible way is he NOT a menace? Are you on drugs?

Well half their membership has dropped. Everyone's over on bluesky now op.

There’s not much critical thinking on this thread seemingly full of people who’ve been told what to think and who to hate by the media.

Where’s your critical thinking ability? Anyone that wants to ban a whole platform is most likely to be a dangerous idiot. Thankfully that power is not in your hands.