Because it’s not about being a shareholder. It’s about trying hurt Dorsey’s pride. “Watch me destroy your greatest achievement!” Musk is trying to damnatio memoriae.

That is assuming Muskbis doing this purposely.

> It’s about trying hurt Dorsey’s pride.

Dorsey was not part of the lawsuit and in fact rolled over his Twitter shares with the acquisition instead of taking the payout, so again the "Revenge for being forced to honor his word at buying Twitter" theory makes no sense.

You're thinking it's about money. It's not. It's about vibes.

I didn't say what it's about. I only said what it's not about: "Revenge for being forced to honor his word at buying Twitter".

Nobody has yet made sense of that nonsensical theory.

I thought that Dorsey was a supporter of the Musk Twitter boondoggle. Or at least less against all Musk's antics than other major shareholders.

Dorsey played Musk not the other way around.

And that's why Musk is mad.

Man, I swear media literacy is trash anymore.

Theoretically, there's a universe where Twitter wasn't bought out and the share price grew substantially, which will never come into place due to Elon's actions?

(I'm grasping at straws, mostly because Elon's ability to spite the shareholders is fairly limited.)

Realistically, Twitter's old leadership were just leading it to the same demise, just slower than Musk now is.