• GreyEyedGhost
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    Who would be the bad faith actor here? Wiwynn? If they don’t have an order, that’s going to fall flat pretty fast. Seems like a pretty risky bet at $60 million. Twitter? Then it isn’t Wiwynn’s problem, Twitter can take care of their bill, and deal with their internal issues.

    • locuester@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t know. Perhaps as part of the acquisition there were some terms regarding situations like this that are in dispute. Even more nuanced, perhaps Wiwynn knowingly took advantage of the acquisition communication issues to assert a level of standing orders that should have been reconsidered.

      Who knows, speculating doesn’t move the needle.

      • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        So stop speculating that the situation is “more nuanced” than the objective article title that paints a picture you don’t like.

        • kautau@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          lol this is literally the same conversation happening elsewhere on the internet about Diddy. There’s a video of him abusing someone. “Stop speculating, we don’t know the whole story.” Speculation is claiming there’s anything beyond a video of him abusing someone. It’s wild how much people love their celebrities to the point of abandoning all logic to defend them.