21 ms·

I mean the whole point of verification is that you "verify" who the person is. Someone else (with a blue tick!) being able to impersonate another verified acco

by tomp 4y ago

I mean the whole point of verification is that you "verify" who the person is. Someone else (with a blue tick!) being able to impersonate another verified account, goes obviously against this. It's literally the same people first complaining about "anyone can buy blue tick" and then "why am I banned by impersonating" - I guess you got what you wanted, no? for the record, I don't think impersonators should be banned, simply that impersonating name changes should be reversed and/or impossible. edit: on second thought, name changes of verified accounts should be disabled and/or limited (pending re-verification)

smcl 4y ago
> complaining about "anyone can buy blue tick" and then "why am I banned by impersonating" - I guess you got what you wanted, no? In a few of the cases I've seen, it's been a litmus test. Like - ok if I follow the rules, mark myself as a "parody" (rolleyes) set my name to Elon Musk and fire off a tweet about how I miss Jeffrey Epstein then either one of two things will happen: 1. I am allowed to stay - fine, I don't love Elon but I can exist here. I'll probably go back to tweeting normally now. 2. I am banned - also fine, I now understand that Twitter is a place where Elon carves out little exceptions to please himself, so I don't wanna be here It's looking like #2 is the case for many accounts. A number of the rest of us who had no interest in doing this are a bit saddened because some people we enjoyed following are gone and the rules/TOS are now almost unknowable, because you also have to append "... or if Elon doesn't like it" to them all. That last bit has a tinge of irony to it, given one of the things he was quite vocal about was making speech more free and open, not less.
joshspankit 4y ago
When I saw the subscription, what I thought was that some portion of that fee was going to the verification process (because it takes resources to verify whether a person is actually who they say they are). I see now that it’s only become a verification of the fact that you’ve paid.
RavingGoat 4y ago
Believe it not there are a lot of people with the same name so allowing anyone to be verified makes verification useless.

by tomp 4y ago

smcl 4y ago

> complaining about "anyone can buy blue tick" and then "why am I banned by impersonating" - I guess you got what you wanted, no? In a few of the cases I've seen, it's been a litmus test. Like - ok if I follow the rules, mark myself as a "parody" (rolleyes) set my name to Elon Musk and fire off a tweet about how I miss Jeffrey Epstein then either one of two things will happen: 1. I am allowed to stay - fine, I don't love Elon but I can exist here. I'll probably go back to tweeting normally now. 2. I am banned - also fine, I now understand that Twitter is a place where Elon carves out little exceptions to please himself, so I don't wanna be here It's looking like #2 is the case for many accounts. A number of the rest of us who had no interest in doing this are a bit saddened because some people we enjoyed following are gone and the rules/TOS are now almost unknowable, because you also have to append "... or if Elon doesn't like it" to them all. That last bit has a tinge of irony to it, given one of the things he was quite vocal about was making speech more free and open, not less.

joshspankit 4y ago

When I saw the subscription, what I thought was that some portion of that fee was going to the verification process (because it takes resources to verify whether a person is actually who they say they are). I see now that it’s only become a verification of the fact that you’ve paid.

RavingGoat 4y ago

Believe it not there are a lot of people with the same name so allowing anyone to be verified makes verification useless.