Sort of. It probably really means someone that echoes Elon’s political views.Too bad they haven't (yet) created a tag that identifies "influencers" so we know who to avoid. And now the checkmark means "gullible sucker who paid for this".
Sort of. It probably really means someone that echoes Elon’s political views.Too bad they haven't (yet) created a tag that identifies "influencers" so we know who to avoid. And now the checkmark means "gullible sucker who paid for this".
It is astronomically stupid to not verify people who get the check mark. That’s what it has always meant. Use something other than a check mark if you want to highlight paying members who aren’t verified.
Too bad they haven't (yet) created a tag that identifies "influencers" so we know who to avoid. And now the checkmark means "gullible sucker who paid for this".
What are you thinking, bringing common sense to an argument?Like that movie 'The Joneses'! A 'family' was created to influence people to buy things, and the results are as you might believe. It's a pretty odd movie, but I liked it...
But it does bring out the truth about human nature for many. People will freely go into debt to get 'the' golf clubs, 'the' car, 'the' stereo, 'the' backyard, on and on. In high school the 'stuff you had to have' was crazy! Some didn't last long at all. I remember when Lee jeans was The Thing, but that fad didn't last. Overalls was popular for a while. 'Painter pants'. Buckle back jeans, macrame belts, stacked heels for boys, wide wale cords, cable knit cotton sweaters, etc, etc, on and on....
Sounds pretty tyrannical and vvv sad. Poor Elon, I’m worried he’s actually a bit simple.No he didn't, he banned accounts that were trying to push his buttons. Not defending Elon, but Kathy Griffin and Ethan Klein weren't doing a "parody" of Elon's Twitter. If their name was "Elon Musk ( PARODY )" or something, fine. But no, they just use "Elon Musk" as their name. And no, having a crappy jpg image that has Parody written on it terribly doesn't make it a parody.
What? That's like saying if everyone had a driver's license no one has a driver's license.If everyone is verified then no-one is verified. It all seems a bit haphazard to be honest, new policy or idea everyday.
This is just abdef-ing laughable. Wow. So you can pay for a Blue check mark but it means really nothing about identity verification but means you are paying to get a blue check mark. 🤷♀️
OK Elon, whatever you say.No he didn't, he banned accounts that were trying to push his buttons. Not defending Elon, but Kathy Griffin and Ethan Klein weren't doing a "parody" of Elon's Twitter. If their name was "Elon Musk ( PARODY )" or something, fine. But no, they just use "Elon Musk" as their name. And no, having a crappy jpg image that has Parody written on it terribly doesn't make it a parody.
So now there’s another ‘elitist’ badge that apparently only Twitter gets to decide who qualifies for one or not. How is that any different than the existing blue check?Blue Check mafia gonna throw a temper tantrum.
Exactly. Twitter Blue needs to come with some sort of badge that shows you have it. Just give it a different symbol from official verification badges and call it a day.Perfect idea. Some of us here suggested they do this.
Can't see why anyone would find a problem with this.
Everyone is. They’re just really bad at it.They’re really just making this up as they go along, aren’t they?
Not defending Elon, but Kathy Griffin and Ethan Klein weren't doing a "parody" of Elon's Twitter.
And if checked is not verified now, then how will that stop bots. If someone's bot makes them over $8/mo, they'll just sub with itIf everyone is verified then no-one is verified. It all seems a bit haphazard to be honest, new policy or idea everyday.