1 minute ago, stevenl said:

In your own words.

"Yes, they were connected and it probably didn't come as a surprise"

Yes I know what I wrote .

Are you expecting me to reply to what I wrote ?

Like , talk to myself ?

7 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes I know what I wrote .

Are you expecting me to reply to what I wrote ?

Like , talk to myself ?

Apparently you don't know what you wrote because you're contradicting yourself. When pointed out that fact you just ignore.

No point in this, I'm out of here.

7 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes I know what I wrote .

Are you expecting me to reply to what I wrote ?

Like , talk to myself ?

Well, it's called defending your comments. Addressing what you previously wrote is obviously not the same as talking to yourself. But clearly you can't reconcile what you wrote earlier with what you have written later. They are, in fact, mutually contradictory. The only thing consistent between these 2 comments is that they both reveal a certain glee in the fate of Twitter employees. And there's this

 

Twitter employees grill CEO Parag Agrawal over fears of post-Musk exodus
This article is more than 5 months old
Workers raise questions about job security and advertising concerns as executives brace for billionaire’s takeover

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/apr/29/twitter-employees-elon-musk-parag-agrawal

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Apparently you don't know what you wrote because you're contradicting yourself. When pointed out that fact you just ignore.

No point in this, I'm out of here.

Its not a contradiction  at all .

Musk took over Twitter and they must have realised that there would be some changes and restructuring and that their jobs may have been at risk .

   They may have known there was the possibility of them being fired , so it wouldn't have been completely out the blue and completely  unexpected , but saying that , there was also the possibility that they wouldn't have been fired .

   They went to work that day not knowing what the future holds and they didnt know whether they would be fired or not . 

9 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, it's called defending your comments. Addressing what you previously wrote is obviously not the same as talking to yourself. But clearly you can't reconcile what you wrote earlier with what you have written later. They are, in fact, mutually contradictory. The only thing consistent between these 2 comments is that they both reveal a certain glee in the fate of Twitter employees. And there's this

 

Not contradictory at all , see my reply above for clarification 

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Not contradictory at all , see my reply above for clarification 

Apparently, in your world, "probably" is just decorative and carries no meaning.

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Apparently, in your world, "probably" is just decorative and carries no meaning.

No, there's a difference between "probably" and a certainty .

Whilst they were not certain they would be fired , they probably realised it would be a possibility 

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

In your own words.

"Yes, they were connected and it probably didn't come as a surprise"

Are you aware of what "probably" means?

Twitter is planning to start charging $20 per month for verification / And if the employees building it don’t meet their deadline, they’ll be fired by Elon Musk.

Twitter is currently planning to charge $19.99 for the new Twitter Blue subscription. Under the current plan, verified users would have 90 days to subscribe or lose their blue checkmark. Employees working on the project were told on Sunday that they need to meet a deadline of November 7th to launch the feature or they will be fired.

Musk has been clear in the months leading up to his acquisition that he wanted to revamp how Twitter verifies accounts and handles bots. On Sunday, he tweeted: “The whole verification process is being revamped right now.”

https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/30/23431931/twitter-paid-verification-elon-musk-blue-monthly-subscription

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

No, there's a difference between "probably" and a certainty .

Whilst they were not certain they would be fired , they probably realised it would be a possibility 

"they probably realised it would be a possibility" is not the same thing as saying something is probable. In this your latest version, a possibility would be just one outcome among a range of others. Not the most likely outcome. Not at all the same thing as saying something is probable. Give it up already. You're just tying yourself up in knots that you leave for me to unravel..

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

"they probably realised it would be a possibility" is not the same thing as saying something is probable. In this your latest version, a possibility would be just one outcome among a range of others. Not the most likely outcome. Not at all the same thing as saying something is probable. Give it up already. You're just tying yourself up in knots that you leave for me to unravel..

Yes, I have tried to explain it the best I could , You seem unable to understand . 

  No point in me trying to explain it again , 

Lets just move on and both understand we are unable to communicate and resolve the issue 

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, I have tried to explain it the best I could , You seem unable to understand . 

  No point in me trying to explain it again , 

Lets just move on and both understand we are unable to communicate and resolve the issue 

There should be nothing difficult in understanding that something is probably a possibility is not the same thing as something is probable. In fact, it's self evident and shouldn't need explaining at all.

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

There should be nothing difficult in understanding that something is probably a possibility is not the same thing as something is probable. In fact, it's self evident and shouldn't need explaining at all.

Yep so easy and simple to understand  

12 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yep so easy and simple to understand  

And yet when challenged, you offer no reasoned defense of your statement. Anyway, I guess this is your way of conceding.

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

And yet when challenged, you offer no reasoned defense of your statement. Anyway, I guess this is your way of conceding.

As I said previously, which you also don't seem to be able to understand , I have tried my best to explain, I cannot explain to a degree that you understand what I am saying , so no point in trying to explain any further 

50 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

As I said previously, which you also don't seem to be able to understand , I have tried my best to explain, I cannot explain to a degree that you understand what I am saying , so no point in trying to explain any further 

But your explanation was false and I pointed out why. You offered no counter-analysis.

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

But your explanation was false and I pointed out why. You offered no counter-analysis.

I tried and failed, nothing more that I can do