Lol. "Can't make good decisions" I guess starting multiple companies worth billions was just luck? I think maybe you should be taking the beam out of your own eye.It shows a lapse in judgement when scruitinay is really on him.
That said it shows him as making bad decisions. Pot has some very negative implications associated with it. It doesn't mean he's a pot head. But one incapable of making good decisions. He should have realized how this would have been viewed negatively if he was a pothead or not.
And youre not santimonious when you are right.
I've been in software and I haven't been drug tested since 2007. /shrug Probably depends on your employer, but it's the same for most of my colleagues. Most of our offices are based in San Francisco, Boston, or Canada, so drug testing for weed would mean a lot of problems.I've been in IT in the Chicago area for 20+ years. EVERY SINGLE ONE has drug tested....so...yeah.
Well sure, but I don't think anyone here was saying smoking while on the clock at work is okay.Everywhere I've worked in the last few decades has this basic clause (paraphrased): "Your time is your own, but when at work - you must be in condition to work."
Even places you'd consider stodgy and conservative were like that. They understand its some really high stress work, and people unwind in different ways. But when you're on the clock - be lucid and knock that shit off.
I said it makes him appear that he can't make good decisions, because that move was quiye frankly the latest of a series of dumb ass ones. He is under more pressure now than any other time in his career.Lol. "Can't make good decisions" I guess starting multiple companies worth billions was just luck? I think maybe you should be taking the beam out of your own eye.
No. You didn't even use the word "appear". You said, "It doesn't mean he's a pot head. But one incapable of making good decisions." That is a flat out assertion of incompetence, and you are wrong.I said it makes him appear that he can't make good decisions, because that move was quiye frankly the latest of a series of dumb ass ones. He is under more pressure now than any other time in his career.
I said it makes him appear that he can't make good decisions, because that move was quiye frankly the latest of a series of dumb ass ones. He is under more pressure now than any other time in his career.
And I'm tired of all the people that ignore the long term effects of pot and other drugs.
I think google has you covered for this...
It would be stupid of he did that because he can still be voted out for being a dummy.Although I doubt this is the case, it is possible that he did this specifically to devalue the company so he can purchase the majority share and realize his dream of taking it private again.
I'm genuinely curious what sources you might be looking at because like the other poster mentioned, Googling isn't returning much evidence to validate your claim. As a matter of fact, if I set the search results to only display results from the past year I find more articles that are at odds with your assertion.
Well said. Remember, he is not a business man by trade, he is not Bill Gates, nor Steve Jobs. He is an engineer, who admits he is not the best at CEO, but wishes to maintain control of his businesses.It's not even nearly as complex an issue as anyone here seems to think it is. He's not your typical bank-style corporate CEO. He's one of those tech-semi-genius (matter of opinion I guess) outlier types that come up every-so-often. His image isn't tied 100% to which suit he wears, how rigidly boring and predictable he is, etc. He dates celebrities, he speaks his mind whether or not it works in his favor, and many things could be chalked up to "wacky publicity stunts" or an air of aloofness. IMO he did this as a spur of the moment, because I can sort of thing (whether or not it was fully thought out) and possibly for a bit of attention. Not because he's stressed out and has a deep seated drug problem trying to cope with everything he's built up. If the latter were the case, it would be VERY apparent. He's just got a somewhat eccentric, slightly erratic personality. Maybe that makes him a slightly shaky bet for certain types of investors, but I think that would be a bit short-sighted. It would be a mistake to write someone off so easily, when they could easily come up with the next humanity-changing item. Then what, everything shifts to a new set of investors, and the old ones lose out? I think with this sort of person you ride things out with minor highs and lows, and unless the person just plain falls apart like a scientologist on a talk show you just call it good. He's kind of your Richard Branson style guy. Charismatic, occasionally brilliant, sometimes a little stupid or goofy, but usually a decent bet.
Why yes I did. But don't take that either way as to my leanings. I review multiple sites for information. Personally I think both sides are full of BS.Did you... ...just link to Fox?
Why yes I did. But don't take that either way as to my leanings. I review multiple sites for information. Personally I think both sides are full of BS.
As they are citing an investment firm, and not writing their own op-ed I thought it somewhat valid.
That's great news. The fickle investors can leave and we can invest while its low.And so it begins...
Hate to tell you I told you so, but I told ya so.
Good. I know it's probably daunting to take a guy like Musk to court with his financial wherewithal and horde of rabid followers, but if a person knows themselves to be innocent, you need to stand up in the face of such.https://www.engadget.com/2018/09/17/elon-musk-sued-pedo-guy-comments/
British cave diver sues Elon Musk over 'pedo guy' comments
Musk called Vernon Unsworth a 'child rapist' last month.