Re:Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors
by dnissley on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @12:35PM
(#30921161)
The word we're searching for here is "divisive"
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors
by rc_mob on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @12:41PM
(#30921268)
I was hoping "unpopular" would be the word we used
Re:Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors
by m463 on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @12:48PM
(#30921393)
maybe controversial? Personally I'm behind 95% of what he does, but the square steering wheel/take away driver control thing is annoying.
Re:Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors
by deltarholamda on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @12:43PM
(#30921316)
The people I agree with are visionaries.
The people I disagree with are divisive.
Re:Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors
by smachiz on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @09:03PM
(#30927160)
Those are not antonyms.
I don't think most people would argue that Musk isn't a visionary. I also don't think most people would argue that Musk isn't divisive.
Re:Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors
by dnissley on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @12:57PM
(#30921537)
Definitely a visionary, no argument here
Re:Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors
by zen_of_prog on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @01:04PM
(#30921647)
Guess that makes you a visionary too
Re:Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors
by ollien on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @12:48PM
(#30921384)
I know the point you're trying to make, but I can't imagine that even the largest Elon Musk fanboys would disagree that he's divisive. At best, I can imagine them saying it's not his fault and people overreact, but that's still recognition of the divisiveness.
Re:Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors
by deltarholamda on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @01:24PM
(#30921928)
Why is Elon described as divisive? Because it sounds bad.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg was never described as divisive, though she was objectively more divisive than a rich guy who makes cars and rocket ships and flamethrowers. Antonin Scalia was described as divisive, so the argument can't be made that SC justices are somehow different.
It's a rhetorical trick that's been used for many decades. It's obvious, and it's tiresome.