(Replying to PARENT post)

At this point, the Twitter board needs to bring in an outside investigatory team.

Mudge, who is well respected in the industry, is saying the executives are lying to the board.

Twitter’s CEO publicly mocks him, refuses to testify to Congress, and instead we hear that people are being offered money to dish dirt on their respected colleague.

If Twitter’s board does not act, then they’re willfully ignorant to the behavior and that negligence is going to harm investors. Lastly, if the board does not act, then the investors need to bring this to vote at the next shareholder meeting.

👤throwoutway🕑3y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Why did Twitter pick Agrawal for their CEO. I hadn't read anything about him before Mudge's revelations and every single thing I've read since has not been kind to him. He seems to be doing a really bad job navigating this event and nobody appears to have any respect for the guy.

But you don't get to be CEO of a company the size of Twitter if you are this bad at managing. So, what's going on?

👤criddell🕑3y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

>>being offered money to dish dirt on their respected colleague.

that dirt also better be security related, not digging up ex's or that he told an offensive joke one time at a conference years ago which seems to be the SOP for "dirt" these days

👤phpisthebest🕑3y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

The board's behavior is a really interesting point. On one hand, they are doing the owners (stockholders) a dis-service by first being gullible enough to be successfully kept ignorant about the company's security situation, and then not making rapid management changes upon being alerted to it(by Mudge, it seems). On the other hand, if they can successfully get Musk to pay the offer price, they have then represented the owners interests very effectively.

The fact that the case is coming up soon makes me think that the board thinks they can focus on the case for now, and fix the company's problems later, after the case, if they win it. If the case looses, they'll be out of a job anyway and it will be some other board's problem.

👤spfzero🕑3y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

The fact that he is still CEO tells me all I need to know about the board.

Mudge is a seriously decorated security expert. Parag is a nobody.

The second he tried to discredit Mudge, he should have been out. But here we are.

I wouldn't touch that stock with my worst enemy's money.

👤silisili🕑3y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

The board and the shareholders are massively incentivized not to show that the execs are lying though, even if they know for certain that they are lying.
👤spywaregorilla🕑3y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> that negligence is going to harm investors.

Only if the truth comes out. If you can control the narrative long enough, it becomes indistinguishable from reality, at least as far as the markets are concerned.

👤munificent🕑3y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

You are speaking from the alternate universe where people care if any of this stuff is ethical. In reality only a tiny cohort of message board nerds (I'm including myself) care and 95% of twitter users, if they ever hear about it all will be over it in about 5 seconds.
👤anm89🕑3y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> Mudge, who is well respected in the industry

Keep in mind, although he's classed as an 'ethical' hacker, many whitehats come from blackhat backgrounds, and turned whitehat because of fear of getting caught up in draconian CFAA[0] trials. Every hacker in their youth done some stupid stuff that could haunt them later. If you didn't do stupid stuff in your youth, you never really grew or learned from it.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act

👤vmoore🕑3y🔼0🗨️0