It's safe to assume that once the secret location of the secretive conference stopped being so secret, the organizers and attendees went looking for a more private venue.
Some have it coming, like the ones at Gawker. Doesn't excuse anything else Thiel has been connected to, of course, but I don't hold that particular lawsuit against him.
>so much for our cherished, upper to middle-class institutions.
The same institutions that said everyone needed to go to overpriced college and that shuttering a steel plant in Ohio just for the same steel to be made in even sketchier conditions overseas was an improvement.
They and their peddlers screech about evil billionares and every other aggravating factor because that's easier than looking in the mirror.
This shit ebbs and flows. The institutions did a lot of it to themselves. They'll crash and burn and in 100yr they'll be back again.
Gawker was a garbage-tier publication. But I absolutely do hold that particular lawsuit against him:
Gawker didn't "out" Thiel in any meaningful sense. Yes, they published and it was tacky. But let's be very real: Thiel's social media and profile pictures were full of things like him shirtless on gay cruises and parties at gay nightclubs. The only people who learned Thiel was gay from Gawker were people who had no particular interest in him.
I also have significant issues with his bankrolling of Hogan's lawsuit against Gawker as an abomination of the legal system, including the right to face one's "accuser":
- Prior to Thiel's involvement, Hogan had already agreed in principle to a part ownership stake and profits of Gawker. He'd also already settled, and forgiven, the person who gave Gawker the sex tape in the first place.
- Lawyers paid for by Thiel pushed for him to drop that and push instead for bankrupting Gawker through damages (which were laughable, see below). (Hypothetical question, if you're an attorney, ostensibly representing Hogan, but you know the person paying your bills, Thiel, wants a different outcome for the case, when push comes to shove, whose interests are you going to represent? See the following point too).
- When the case and awarded damages -did- actually threaten to bankrupt Gawker, Thiel/Hogan's lawyers did the most illogical thing possible, if they were looking to recoup any money for their ostensible client... they dropped the one claim against Gawker that would have allowed their liability insurance to at least partially pay out. Remember, Hogan could use that money far, far more than Thiel.
(Re damages: The amount that Hogan had originally asked for seemed reasonable. Then after Thiel's lawyers got involved, the amount asked for was multiplied five thousand times.)
This included economic damages of fifty million dollars. For a man who had made something in the order of $20-25M his entire career? Who had a net worth at its peak of $30M, and at the time of the lawsuit, a NW of $8M? I highly doubt that TV stations pulling reruns of old WWF events, hair loss commercials and other endorsements was worth that. (They separately asked for emotional damages, too, to be clear. But there was near zero justification for this economic damages claim.)
I wonder how much Thiel paid Hogan under the table for this proxy lawsuit? Because it sure looks like he was playing puppeteer, and while Hogan had every right to be bitter about what Gawker did, his every action to resolve or plan to resolve the matter pivoted 180 degrees the moment "his" lawyers got involved, and perhaps unsurprisingly, the outcome perfectly aligned with Thiel's goals.
What did Taylor Swift and many celebs do yesterday at Madison Square Garden (a public venue)? All the news says she got married, but does that mean you're trusting the news media?
The group used to be pretty secretive and unknown until a hacker managed to discover Dialog not protecting their membership data properly - and found, among others, a shit ton of billionaires [1] and politicians including former German health minister Jens Spahn [2].
This is likely more an invite list than a membership list. Not defending it. But it's more like being a high profile, influential or powerful person and being invited to an exclusive conference than it is being a member of SPECTRE.
What meaningful complaint can you have about a meeting that includes Ted Cruz on one side and Wes Moore on the other; both Peter Thiel and Reid Hoffman?
He has been politically active trying to roll back CDA Section 230 protections for social media companies because he conflates social media algorithms being “editorial” with what actions are actually protected by CDA 230.
He made an pinned Instagram post about his association with this group (link to his account, not to the post):
While Thiel's recent Antichrist talks could come to mind, this could just as easily be business speak, like in the Collins/Porras "Built to Last" where one of the points of great companies is "Cult-like culture".
Aren’t most events at hotels “secretive”? Our company all hands certainly isn’t a public event. It’s seems reasonable that defense companies may not always want their events to be public and in newspapers
In all the company events and such that I've been to at hotels and casinos, there's usually signs in the lobby, "Welcome X", or at least on the screens or signs by conference room doors telling you exactly who is there (I will not pretend, and know, that this is not always the case. But it's generally fairly trivial to figure these things out.)
It's safe to assume that once the secret location of the secretive conference stopped being so secret, the organizers and attendees went looking for a more private venue.
Hotel wants to avoid undesirable guests. Seems reasonable.
How is this secretive if venue is public?
It wasn't public until a an investigative journalist wrote an article about it after the membership of the group was exposed first. Per TFA:
> A leaked schedule for the “retreat” hosted by Dialog, an invitation-only group
Working as intended. Though Peter Thiel will do his utmost to further destroy journalists, I’m sure.
Some have it coming, like the ones at Gawker. Doesn't excuse anything else Thiel has been connected to, of course, but I don't hold that particular lawsuit against him.
Thiel chose an easy target, and opened the door to destroying journalism.
As un-American as it gets but hey, he’s the right color with legal bundles of cash; so much for our cherished, upper to middle-class institutions.
>so much for our cherished, upper to middle-class institutions.
The same institutions that said everyone needed to go to overpriced college and that shuttering a steel plant in Ohio just for the same steel to be made in even sketchier conditions overseas was an improvement.
They and their peddlers screech about evil billionares and every other aggravating factor because that's easier than looking in the mirror.
This shit ebbs and flows. The institutions did a lot of it to themselves. They'll crash and burn and in 100yr they'll be back again.
Gawker was a garbage-tier publication. But I absolutely do hold that particular lawsuit against him:
Gawker didn't "out" Thiel in any meaningful sense. Yes, they published and it was tacky. But let's be very real: Thiel's social media and profile pictures were full of things like him shirtless on gay cruises and parties at gay nightclubs. The only people who learned Thiel was gay from Gawker were people who had no particular interest in him.
I also have significant issues with his bankrolling of Hogan's lawsuit against Gawker as an abomination of the legal system, including the right to face one's "accuser":
- Prior to Thiel's involvement, Hogan had already agreed in principle to a part ownership stake and profits of Gawker. He'd also already settled, and forgiven, the person who gave Gawker the sex tape in the first place.
- Lawyers paid for by Thiel pushed for him to drop that and push instead for bankrupting Gawker through damages (which were laughable, see below). (Hypothetical question, if you're an attorney, ostensibly representing Hogan, but you know the person paying your bills, Thiel, wants a different outcome for the case, when push comes to shove, whose interests are you going to represent? See the following point too).
- When the case and awarded damages -did- actually threaten to bankrupt Gawker, Thiel/Hogan's lawyers did the most illogical thing possible, if they were looking to recoup any money for their ostensible client... they dropped the one claim against Gawker that would have allowed their liability insurance to at least partially pay out. Remember, Hogan could use that money far, far more than Thiel.
(Re damages: The amount that Hogan had originally asked for seemed reasonable. Then after Thiel's lawyers got involved, the amount asked for was multiplied five thousand times.)
This included economic damages of fifty million dollars. For a man who had made something in the order of $20-25M his entire career? Who had a net worth at its peak of $30M, and at the time of the lawsuit, a NW of $8M? I highly doubt that TV stations pulling reruns of old WWF events, hair loss commercials and other endorsements was worth that. (They separately asked for emotional damages, too, to be clear. But there was near zero justification for this economic damages claim.)
I wonder how much Thiel paid Hogan under the table for this proxy lawsuit? Because it sure looks like he was playing puppeteer, and while Hogan had every right to be bitter about what Gawker did, his every action to resolve or plan to resolve the matter pivoted 180 degrees the moment "his" lawyers got involved, and perhaps unsurprisingly, the outcome perfectly aligned with Thiel's goals.
What did Taylor Swift and many celebs do yesterday at Madison Square Garden (a public venue)? All the news says she got married, but does that mean you're trusting the news media?
Public venue, private ("secret") event.
the highest net worth LAN party ever
Like area 51.
The group used to be pretty secretive and unknown until a hacker managed to discover Dialog not protecting their membership data properly - and found, among others, a shit ton of billionaires [1] and politicians including former German health minister Jens Spahn [2].
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2026/06/18/what-we...
[2] https://correctiv.org/aktuelles/das-spahn-netzwerk/2026/06/1...
Find the hacktivist and ensure that that the book of law is thrown good and hard at them in court.
No different than if the opposition did the same to a left leaning/sympathizing group.
Part of the list:
General Alexus Grynkewich, NATO's supreme allied commander Europe
Treasury secretary Scott Bessent
Army secretary Dan Driscoll
Hallie Hoffman, acting chief of staff of the Drug Enforcement Administration
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn)
Wes Moore, Maryland governor
Jared Polis, Colorado governor
Tom Lue, general counsel and head of governance at Google DeepMind
Randy Kroszner, a former governor of the Federal Reserve
Jonathan Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League
Peter Goettler, president of the Cato Institute
Ryan Stowers, executive director of the Charles Koch Foundation
Roger Myerson, Nobel laureate economist
Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law
Neal Mohan, YouTube CEO
Scooter Braun, Music manager
Ezra Klein, political commentator
Souad Mekhennet, Washington Post reporter
Joseph Gordon-Levitt, actor
Sophia Bush, actress
Rick Warren, evangelical pastor
Elon Musk ($1.3 trillion)
Eric Schmidt ($40.1 billion)
Peter Thiel ($27.8 billion)
Henry Kravis ($12.2 billion)
Marcos Galperin ($6.8 billion)
Mike Cannon-Brookes ($7.7 billion)
Scott Cook ($4.4 billion)
Barry Sternlicht ($3.1 billion)
Nicolas Berggruen ($2.9 billion)
John Arnold ($2.8 billion)
Joe Lonsdale ($2.8 billion)
Reid Hoffman ($2.7 billion)
This is likely more an invite list than a membership list. Not defending it. But it's more like being a high profile, influential or powerful person and being invited to an exclusive conference than it is being a member of SPECTRE.
What meaningful complaint can you have about a meeting that includes Ted Cruz on one side and Wes Moore on the other; both Peter Thiel and Reid Hoffman?
If you mean in terms of political party leaning, we've had many years to observe how Rich vs Poor can override Right vs Left.
Are Corey Booker, Wes Moore, and Jared Polis rich?
It does? Because from recent US election results the exact opposite would seem to be true.
I make $500k/year TC, that means I'm rich right? Right?
$500k is a heck of a lot closer to $0 than it is to $1B
Which shows the great divide plainly. $450K individual TC puts you in the 1% as of 2025.
I'm trying to understand if you think that you are rich or not. Every time I read it I flip if you are serious or sarcastic.
Most shockingly, Kaja Kallas, EU Foreign Representative.
I want to know what the hell Joseph Gordon-Levitt is planning...
He has been politically active trying to roll back CDA Section 230 protections for social media companies because he conflates social media algorithms being “editorial” with what actions are actually protected by CDA 230.
He made an pinned Instagram post about his association with this group (link to his account, not to the post):
https://www.instagram.com/hitrecordjoe/
He’s involved in the effective altruism movement and Hollywood AI policy
"Cult-building" on the agenda?
While Thiel's recent Antichrist talks could come to mind, this could just as easily be business speak, like in the Collins/Porras "Built to Last" where one of the points of great companies is "Cult-like culture".
Yes. There are companies which want "passion", which is really about employee motivation. Zappos, which is a shoe store, has been laughed at for this.
I guess if you think you're meeting is a secret then you can just say what your agenda is out in the open.
I mean there's no question these guys are the baddies, right? Look at every reason Peter Thiel has been in the news for the last year
Aren’t most events at hotels “secretive”? Our company all hands certainly isn’t a public event. It’s seems reasonable that defense companies may not always want their events to be public and in newspapers
Advertised? No. Secretive? No.
In all the company events and such that I've been to at hotels and casinos, there's usually signs in the lobby, "Welcome X", or at least on the screens or signs by conference room doors telling you exactly who is there (I will not pretend, and know, that this is not always the case. But it's generally fairly trivial to figure these things out.)
Whatever happened to all those 4channers going after the super secret cabal running the deepstate?
They voted for the cabal and shot up a pizzeria. Womp womp.
They probably haven't even realized they were Steve Bannon's useful idiots.