Exactly!This is really sending some people off their rockers. It's entertaining how easy it is for Elon to troll those outraged; AOC's overpriced sweatshirt and how it's the price of a $8 starbucks.
I’d go one step further. Nominal fee ($1 a year) for elected officials using government funds. Why? If they use government $$$ they can’t use the account for electoral reasons. They want their private/political account? $8/month.
I routinely delete stuff from my Facebook. It applied in 2014, it doesn’t apply anymore. Or simply I don’t like the look of myself or something. It’s my text, I do whatever I want with it.
How does that work when using dark mode? What I see is a white circle with black check.
So if a politician starts deleting old tweets because they don’t want people to see controversial things they’ve said in the past (or because they’ve cynically changed their positions) you’re fine with them having the ability to do so?
Have Zuckerberg and Elon ever both been verifiably seen at the same time?
Good point. Maybe have G for government instead of a checkmark. Bottom line, differentiate between a Government entity, an elected official, and verified non-governmental users.
See my other post about separating government entities (which do have retention schedules), and elected officials.
Not everyone has a money tree in their back yard with an infinite amount of leafs. Maybe they can spend $20 on coffee/drinks a day because they listen to adds in between music and don't get various subscriptions. It's all about managing your balance and doing what you like. I don't have to listen to adds in between music plus other things but I never buy coffee while I am out on my own. Only when I am meeting with friends.
I thought that there was an escape clause that he could cancel the buyout but it would cost him 1 billion dollars. If Twitter does go belly up he will lose more than that. But that’s still an “if” , not a “when”.
I see your sarcasm, but do you not think paying content creators and quelling bots is an improvement?
Well the ‘blue checks’ I’ve seen complain about aren’t saying it’s bad because peasants like you and me will get a checkmark too but that Twitter shouldn’t need to charge for verification (or at least not a monthly fee) and just giving someone a checkmark if they pay Twitter $8/mo isn’t solving any problems. Like I asked earlier, will the $8 actually be a real verification and will those users be required to display their real name?
It’s because people think he’s paying $44B by his own money. Before even starting this thing after showing interest he had to gather several investors and banks, and they do not hand out billions without a plan and good contingencies.
And all the lunatics that are closing their accounts because their feelings are getting hurt, and the fact that Musk is bringing truth bombs and fair balance to your upside down world, there are just as many of us that will migrate back to the platform and happily pay the $8. I mean the audacity of him allowing debate and forcing the lunatics to actually engage in conversations and have to actually have to back up their beliefs..... yeah, I can see why the heads are exploding.
How can they complain about it if they don’t even know how the verification process will be? Implementation of the feature will be the key, but no one knows how it will work as of now. If it’s “pay $8 and you’re verified”, well then yeah there might be an issue. If it’s “pay $8, send us your phone number, verify your address, verify that you’re a human (twitter biggest issue as of now)” then issues might be resolved.
No way he would do that now. His ego is too big to essentially backtrack on his 'slay' of AOC about the fee.
What do you mean? What improvements have we really seen or witnessed?
He can waive it for “US D-NY 14th District” and still have “AOC” pay.
Government accounts, not elected officials.
Don't forget promotion up the algorithm to help quell bots and the ability to upload long form video.
