Kind of a biased sample tbh

Who knows better than the employees ofc

Not really. Plenty of examples of companies where the employees were bought into a failed company.

That indicates they weren't employees of that company before...

Which is unrelated to my statement.

You mean because the sample was people who weren't fired? What bias do you expect from that?

Which bias are you thinking of? "People who are on Blind"? Ordinarily I'd be inclined to agree, but per the article, the vast bulk of Twitter employees actually do seem to be there.

Had to be to find 11% optimistic

A month ago, I would have said this is naive. That, for all his ego, 420 jokes, and poor estimation of project timelines, he's mostly run Tesla very well, with a coherent, long-term vision, and delivered quite substantially -- even if very behind schedule.

But seeing how eratically he's run Twitter in his first month it's clear he has no idea what he's doing. Whatever you may think about his "4d chess" plans in regards to the moves he's making, if they were good long term ideas he wouldn't be backpedalling on them constantly, it's as simple as that.

I don't know whether his success at Tesla is a facade and all attributable to other, smarter people keeping him inline - or if he's just good at running a car company and bad at running a social media company, or what. And I'm not even saying he can't turn this disaster around eventually. But as it stands now it's clear he's not thinking about his decisions at Twitter before he makes them.

It's kinda funny we ended up with the ultimate 'tweet before you think'-er owning and running Twitter.

Sampling bias? This was run by a totally separate private company. It was opt-in.