Discussion: Thiel Says He Won't 'Draw The Line' On Privacy In Op-Ed Slamming Gawker

1 Like

This guy really pisses me off. Too much money, too much power and a Trump supporter to boot. I guess for him, greed Trumps gay.

10 Likes

“It’s not for me to draw the line. It’s just for me to use my money to enforce an invisible line which I’ve secretly defined in my head.”

The effect of this rule seems…somehow…chilling?

11 Likes

What a sanctimonious little diva you are Thiel…‘funny’ how no one is safe from YOU but you will ‘draw the line’ for those you deem worthy.

2 Likes

He has a right to be angry about being outed. Outing someone against their will is despicable. Sadly, he also has the right to fund lawsuit after lawsuit in an attempt to silence Gawker and anyone else he feels has done him wrong. But that is just as despicable as being outed.

1 Like

That’s why he was a legitimate target: too much money and power, too much self-importance. Thiel deserved to be taken down a few notches.

I wonder if there isn’t some potential counter-suit under SLAPP. California has serious anti-SLAPP laws. That’s why Thiel tried to keep his participation a secret, if anyone had known he was funding the lawsuits, Gawker could have filed an anti-SLAPP motion and stopped the whole process.

2 Likes

No he doesn’t

This fight started on account of Thiel and others going after others in the LGBTQ community.

Now if the debate is on the idea of privacy, then.his past actions (before being outed) need to be reviewed.

7 Likes

Privacy being the word, I wonder if Thiel ironically supports Assange? Wonder if he’s hypocritical enough?

1 Like

And now he has to worry about being outed as a vampire. Such woes!

2 Likes

Yep, he gets to decide which reporters will have to put up with an infinitely-funded enemy. Oddly enough, he doesn’t seem to have ponied up any money for reporters defending against having to disclose the names of their sources or other wise preserve privacy.

2 Likes

$40,000/quarter for transfusions and he can’t spend $100 for some Clarins skin products to help with that rough skin? Jeebus on a Triscuit.

I know I am not going to be in the majority here, but I have to say that Gawker deserved what happened to them. They definitely crossed a bright line – repeatedly – on invasion of privacy. I hate that a prick like Thiel was the one that took them down, but I am very glad somebody did.

2 Likes

Billionaire crybaby says what?

3 Likes

Whoa. Dorian Gray wannabee?

What a nut.

1 Like

“It’s not for me to draw the line.”

Thief continued, "I will, however, use my money to support a frivolous lawsuit against the publisher who offended my fee-fees and attempt to destroy their business. Let’s face it, Gawker is a publication which thrives on publicity and controversy. The mere fact that Thiel tried to get his revenge via Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit is beyond smarmy. He wasn’t man enough to sue Gawker himself, so he bankrolled Hogan’s attempt to do so. As others have pointed out, the only reason they went after Thiel in the first place is that while he was a “closeted” gay man, he was attacking others for their behavior. A rich, spoiled hypocrite; yes, let’s call him a hero. I call BS.

I am a very straight, female, much older than Thiel and was based in the same city as Thiel at the time. I knew he was gay back in about 2002? 2003? It was common knowledge.
So I the faux outrage is kind of … opportunistic.

2 Likes

All pretty rich for a guy who’s a board member of Facebook - a company that’ll sell everything they know about you to any company that wants the data.

5 Likes

Gawker was the bully who took kids’ lunch money and pushed them around. I’m glad someone came along to push back. I’m always happy to see a bully get what he or she deserves.

Even when it is just a bigger bully satisfying his own unrelated private vendetta doing the pushing?

Every major newspaper or widely circulated magazine has a legal department and lawyers to rein in stories that could get the institution in legal hot water. We don’t consider that infringement on free speech. Gawker thought they could write whatever they wanted and damage lives with impunity. It doesn’t work that way. The idiocy of Gawkers legacy is they choose to die upon the most trivial, absurd and irrelevant hill imaginable. If you had leaked documents from CIA files detailing war crimes, I might be sympathetic. But they pick a washed up old aging professional wrestlers unauthorized private sex tape as their line in the sand. So puerile.

1 Like