World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I don't know if this is the article (its pay walled), or AI since it's a summary, or maybe OP, but this is a terrible reporting of what happened.
The pay package was supposed to be independently created by the board, but it was found out that Elon had a heavy hand in proposing it, including the people helping him craft it. Now, I don't think this is bad per say, but then the board was supposed to independently vet it, but the board wasn't really deemed independent, and who they used had ties to Musk. Further, it wasn't properly disclosed what involvement Musk had in crafting the package in the first place.
The failure to properly disclose all of this made the shareholder vote void. Had they disclosed it, and had it been approved, it would have been okay.
It had nothing to do with not having insufficient shareholder approval.
One more problem was that the various milestones had projections for likelihood and time to completion, but what they presented to the shareholders was different than their internal projections.
So not only did they think some of these milestones were likely, they lied to shareholders about how likely they were to make the package seem more difficult to achieve.
I knew (but forgot) they thought the 1st one was likely and didn't disclose it, was it others as well?
I forget the exact number, but it was the first few. Maybe 3?
*per se
TIL, thanks.
Paying someone a billion dollars or more at a company should require unanimous shareholder approval. One nay should strike it down. It's egregious and unnecessary.
A billion dollars can buy you a hundred people at 10 million a piece, that's gonna get you a shitload of celebrity involvement and endorsement. The value of the shares in this asshole's pay package is over 100 billion as of early December.
The shareholders chose to do it, it's their company, they can do whatever they want with it (as long as they weren't misled as the judge has ruled they were).
Trying to control what the shareholders do with their company like that is not the way to solve a problem. And if you don't own any voting shares, then you have no reason to complain about what they decide to do.
The payment comes out of their pocket, by the devaluation of their stock, when the options are issued and vested. They went into it knowing they'd make a shit load of money if he pulled it off, and he'd make a shit load of money too. The stock has 25x'd since the package was created.
Edit: Just to be clear here - A better way would be through a high tax bracket that would eat the vast majority of that away forcing him to sell most of the shares (or I guess alternatively sell SpaceX shares, it'd be his choice), but keep in mind it'd be at the rate when each set vests, so it's not a tax bill on 55b, it's a series of tax bills on smaller amounts.