5 ms·

I never liked the classist undertones associated with the twitter verified badges. In some ways it’s satisfying to see the badge stripped of its meaning and pre

by valine 4y ago

I never liked the classist undertones associated with the twitter verified badges. In some ways it’s satisfying to see the badge stripped of its meaning and prestige. That being said the way Musk is going about these changes is damaging to Twitter in the short term. Will be interesting to see if Twitter survives when the dust settles.

sorenjan 4y ago
> I never liked the classist undertones associated with the twitter verified badges. In some ways it’s satisfying to see the badge stripped of its meaning a prestige. This seems to be a recurring opinion of Twitter users, but as someone who doesn't use it I thought it was just a way to prove that some slightly public figure is who they say they are and not some imposter? It seems weird to be upset that "Elon Musk " is Elon Musk and not some crypto scammer (maybe a bad example), so I guess I'm missing something.
- bombcar 4y ago
  That's still how it was for the highest profile users (Trump had the check mark, remember) - but down in the lower-regions it was a status symbol for those who "made it" - and the rumor is that status symbol could be gamed. Verification had a "notoriety" aspect - I couldn't get verified because I'm a nobody; dang might be able to, Paul Graham for sure.
  - paulpauper 4y ago
    I think it changed and nobodies can get verified if they submit docs
- grok22 4y ago
  Yeah, I too don't understand why the earlier system was 'classist'? It seemed like a better way to be sure that someone was who they said they were? The proposed mechanism of paying to get a check-mark seems suspect. I understand paying for extra features, but paying to say "I am who I am" seems like it could get abused and not a good idea. Now only people who think they need to pay for it and think it worthwhile will get it and that seems like classist in a different way.
- Pyrodogg 4y ago
  That's largely the way I've viewed it as well by being exposed to more prominent infosec people than A-list celebrities. But it's also not enough. You can change your name, photo, bio, to be like someone else, even if you have the checkmark. Users have to also read the handle (unique within the app), but the page styling gives that significantly less emphasis. Jeph Jacques, author of Questionable Content webcomic and verified Twitter user, has been having fun this week by making a parody of Musks's account. https://twitter.com/jephjacques https://twitter.com/jephjacques (currently partially restricted, but you can click through) "Name + Checkmark" doesn't make a good certificate of authenticity.
prvc 4y ago
> In some ways it’s satisfying to see the badge stripped of its meaning and prestige. The only official "meaning" of the badge was that the user matched the identity of the profile, even though more was read into it both by users and employees. The notion that it will now be possible to "pay to impersonate" is absurd, but I have seen it being spread widely on social media and on television!
- habitue 4y ago
  > The only official "meaning" of the badge was that the user matched the identity of the profile That's what they said, but what happened in actual practice is that you had to have a certain level of fame or notoriety to get a blue check. Everyone knows this, it isn't just "reading into it"
- simondotau 4y ago
  > The notion that it will now be possible to "pay to impersonate" is absurd It is indeed quite obviously absurd, which is why it seems strange that so many people are assuming that this is exactly what is going to occur. It doesn't take much thinking to imagine ways they could allow anyone to get verified while not allowing impersonation. For example—and this is just the first idea that comes to mind—they could require people to consent to their username being locked in return for that checkmark.
  - simondotau 4y ago
    And there we go— https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589396236464898048 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589396236464898048
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by valine 4y ago

sorenjan 4y ago

> I never liked the classist undertones associated with the twitter verified badges. In some ways it’s satisfying to see the badge stripped of its meaning a prestige. This seems to be a recurring opinion of Twitter users, but as someone who doesn't use it I thought it was just a way to prove that some slightly public figure is who they say they are and not some imposter? It seems weird to be upset that "Elon Musk " is Elon Musk and not some crypto scammer (maybe a bad example), so I guess I'm missing something.

bombcar 4y ago
That's still how it was for the highest profile users (Trump had the check mark, remember) - but down in the lower-regions it was a status symbol for those who "made it" - and the rumor is that status symbol could be gamed. Verification had a "notoriety" aspect - I couldn't get verified because I'm a nobody; dang might be able to, Paul Graham for sure.
- paulpauper 4y ago
  I think it changed and nobodies can get verified if they submit docs
grok22 4y ago
Yeah, I too don't understand why the earlier system was 'classist'? It seemed like a better way to be sure that someone was who they said they were? The proposed mechanism of paying to get a check-mark seems suspect. I understand paying for extra features, but paying to say "I am who I am" seems like it could get abused and not a good idea. Now only people who think they need to pay for it and think it worthwhile will get it and that seems like classist in a different way.
Pyrodogg 4y ago
That's largely the way I've viewed it as well by being exposed to more prominent infosec people than A-list celebrities. But it's also not enough. You can change your name, photo, bio, to be like someone else, even if you have the checkmark. Users have to also read the handle (unique within the app), but the page styling gives that significantly less emphasis. Jeph Jacques, author of Questionable Content webcomic and verified Twitter user, has been having fun this week by making a parody of Musks's account. https://twitter.com/jephjacques https://twitter.com/jephjacques (currently partially restricted, but you can click through) "Name + Checkmark" doesn't make a good certificate of authenticity.

prvc 4y ago

> In some ways it’s satisfying to see the badge stripped of its meaning and prestige. The only official "meaning" of the badge was that the user matched the identity of the profile, even though more was read into it both by users and employees. The notion that it will now be possible to "pay to impersonate" is absurd, but I have seen it being spread widely on social media and on television!

habitue 4y ago
> The only official "meaning" of the badge was that the user matched the identity of the profile That's what they said, but what happened in actual practice is that you had to have a certain level of fame or notoriety to get a blue check. Everyone knows this, it isn't just "reading into it"
simondotau 4y ago
> The notion that it will now be possible to "pay to impersonate" is absurd It is indeed quite obviously absurd, which is why it seems strange that so many people are assuming that this is exactly what is going to occur. It doesn't take much thinking to imagine ways they could allow anyone to get verified while not allowing impersonation. For example—and this is just the first idea that comes to mind—they could require people to consent to their username being locked in return for that checkmark.
- simondotau 4y ago
  And there we go— https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589396236464898048 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589396236464898048

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]