
The New CEO’s First Moves - douche
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/153905823756/the-new-ceos-first-moves-and-trump
======
bko
Reading Scott Adams is exhausting. I feel like his posts are a writing
exercise to see how many times one can use the words persuasion

You don't need a business filter to understand that politicians love high
visibility projects. A common thread with Adams posts is that he fetishises
anything Trump does as genius and, prior to the election, demonizes everything
Clinton did as manipulative. That and he gave a lot of credit to conspiracy
theories. Honestly I think he's trolling by now.

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
> Honestly I think he's trolling by now.

You're giving him more credit than I think he's due.

------
exabrial
Conspiracy theories aside, rational, open discourse is necessary for a free
society. Another HN user put it very eloquently:

    
    
      This U.S. election has been an important inflection point in displaying the bias and application of bias
      by "apparently" disinterested entities like Twitter, reddit and the like - places that claim
      to advocate diversity and openness, yet struggle to do so in the face of conflict.

~~~
clifanatic
> struggle to do so

I don't think they're struggling very hard. If anything, they're struggling to
make it look like there's anything except complete bias.

------
serge2k
was Scott Adams always insane and he got exposed this election, or did
something happen to him?

Edit: To be clear I mean the constant "I'm being watched/I'm being abused/they
want to kill me" conspiracy theories that have been coupled with his lavish
praise for Trump.

~~~
socalnate1
He was always insane, it was just better hidden. See the very end of his 1997
book "The Dilbert Future" where he essentially tells us how he bends the
universe to his will with "The Secret" style positive thinking.

------
hartator
> Facts don’t matter. What matters is how you feel.

This is why democrats lost the elections. Facts matter. You can't justify war
on ISIS based on their barbaric laws and think Saudi Arabia financing HRC is
the best thing ever. People can see the dissonance.

~~~
daughart
Except "Saudia Arabia financing HRC" is not a factual statement.

~~~
hartator
> Saudi Arabia has been a particularly generous benefactor. The kingdom gave
> between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation. (Donations
> are typically reported in broad ranges, not specific amounts.) At least $1
> million more was donated by Friends of Saudi Arabia, which was co-founded by
> a Saudi prince.

Ref: [http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/hillary-
clinto...](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/hillary-clinton-
presidential-campaign-charity.html)

~~~
caseydurfee
The Clinton Foundation is a global healthcare charity.
[https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summar...](https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680)

It does not personally benefit the Clintons (other than the prestige). I've
donated to Michael J. Fox's foundation. Does that make me his benefactor?

~~~
btdiehr
Is this why Clinton Foundation donations have massively fallen sense she lost
the election?

Are we now assuming every charity is on equal moral grounds?

~~~
dragonwriter
> Is this why Clinton Foundation donations have massively fallen sense she
> lost the election?

If you are already see Clinton as corrupt, you'll see the reported drop in,
particularly, foreign-government-linked donations as Clinton having less
influence to sell.

If you already see Trump as petty and vindictive, or even merely widely
perceived as such, you'Lloyd see it is people who may need to deal with the
Trump Administration avoiding antagonizing that Administration.

~~~
btdiehr
How about the Qataar donation of a million dollars to the CF which they never
reported?

> The Clinton Foundation has confirmed it accepted a $1 million gift from
> Qatar while Hillary Clinton was U.S. secretary of state without informing
> the State Department, even though she had promised to let the agency review
> new or significantly increased support from foreign governments.

[http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-foundation-
id...](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-foundation-
idUSKBN12Z2SL)

~~~
toomuchtodo
I appreciate your efforts to correct the record ;)

------
Jordrok
Ok, ignoring all the other Trump stuff in the post for the moment, I'm
confused about something. At the end, he claims to be shadowbanned on Twitter,
yet a quick check of his twitter account shows his last tweet was 4 hours ago,
and he has visible tweets for every day for as far back as I bothered to
check. (about a week)

Am I missing something?

~~~
btdiehr
He's referring to the fact that his tweets won't appear in peoples streams,
this is a way to reduce his influence in the twitter sphere.

~~~
Jordrok
Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification.

As a side note, I wanted to check if that was really the case so I just
created a new twitter account to test with, and even with the "Tailor Twitter
based on my recent website visits" option unchecked, Scott Adams showed up as
the very first and only suggested person to follow in the "You might also be
interested in" section. Creepy...

EDIT: ----

And holy shit, I just refreshed the page and now I see this:

 _Your account has been locked.

(Your Name) @(username) What happened? Your account appears to have exhibited
automated behavior that violates the Twitter Rules. To unlock your account,
please complete the steps below and confirm that you are the valid account
owner. What you can do: To unlock your account, you must do the following:
Verify your phone number_

Goddamnit Twitter, you are not doing yourself any favors here.

~~~
Ronin354
Honestly because of people like you who takes time to fact check and post the
method used are the only reason I come to HN. Strangely I have never met
people like this in real life. Long live internet.

