3 ms·

Why? Because “I’m rebellious”?

by m3kw9 4y ago

Dudelander 4y ago
Twitter blue subscribers get boosted independent of the quality of the tweet, blocking them improves user experience.
epistasis 4y ago
There are many many ways it improves my experience: * I don't care about high follower count tweets, I'm not there for viral tweets, or popular media or generally anything that there are 1M in the world even care about. I'm there for niche experts that can not be found anywhere else * I really don't care about reading the tweets of people who have to pay in order to get their opinion boosted. I do know severa people that have paid for Twitter for a long time, and would whitelist them. But otherwise, a blue check mark has become a very good signal for lower quality content that is likely to be some BS political propaganda I don't want in my life. I don't want NFT hustlers or get-rich-quick schemers rising to the top of any discussion. The whole "verification" scheme was always of minimal utility on the site, mostly for making sure that what you're reading from a notable person actually came from that person and not an imposter. That was the value for users. Now that it's gone, the blue check mark has no positive value to me, and in fact 99% of the discussion from blue check mark holders is pointless idiotic defense of their purchases which is a massive waste of everybody's time. I do not care, burn it all with fire so I can get rid of the noise.
threeseed 4y ago
Twitter Blue (a) artificially increases reach and (b) signals to others that you're part of their so-called movement i.e. you're someone who is partial to culture wars. If you're interested in non-political, high-quality content from those who are genuine about creating it then blocking Twitter Blue users is going to increase the overall signal to noise ratio.
- m3kw9 4y ago
  You also gonna get bots as that was the intended purpose as it makes bot armies very expensive to keep, also to keep twitter afloat.
rsynnott 4y ago
Twitter blue users under the new system, generally, are paying for _attention_. Generally people who pay for attention are not worth giving attention to; their content is rarely worthwhile. Twitter blue acts as a sort of convenient filter heuristic; just filtering the lot out, you’re going to have a couple of false positives, but it’ll improve your experience. Attention is like sex; if you have to pay for it, the other participants probably aren’t enjoying it much.
bigbillheck 4y ago
The people who have paid-for bluechecks, by and large, seem to fall into a few different overlapping categories: 1. People promoting their own personal brand (including meme accounts and sex workers) 2. Musk stans 3. Crypto people 4. MAGA I'm willing to cut a break for some of the accounts in (1) on a case-by-case basis but I've seen all I care to see of (2), (3), and (4) so even if any given tweet from someone is innocuous--and they're not clearly in (1)--the bluecheck is a great signal to block.

Why? Because “I’m rebellious”?

by m3kw9 4y ago

Why? Because “I’m rebellious”?

Dudelander 4y ago

Twitter blue subscribers get boosted independent of the quality of the tweet, blocking them improves user experience.

epistasis 4y ago

There are many many ways it improves my experience: * I don't care about high follower count tweets, I'm not there for viral tweets, or popular media or generally anything that there are 1M in the world even care about. I'm there for niche experts that can not be found anywhere else * I really don't care about reading the tweets of people who have to pay in order to get their opinion boosted. I do know severa people that have paid for Twitter for a long time, and would whitelist them. But otherwise, a blue check mark has become a very good signal for lower quality content that is likely to be some BS political propaganda I don't want in my life. I don't want NFT hustlers or get-rich-quick schemers rising to the top of any discussion. The whole "verification" scheme was always of minimal utility on the site, mostly for making sure that what you're reading from a notable person actually came from that person and not an imposter. That was the value for users. Now that it's gone, the blue check mark has no positive value to me, and in fact 99% of the discussion from blue check mark holders is pointless idiotic defense of their purchases which is a massive waste of everybody's time. I do not care, burn it all with fire so I can get rid of the noise.

threeseed 4y ago

Twitter Blue (a) artificially increases reach and (b) signals to others that you're part of their so-called movement i.e. you're someone who is partial to culture wars. If you're interested in non-political, high-quality content from those who are genuine about creating it then blocking Twitter Blue users is going to increase the overall signal to noise ratio.

m3kw9 4y ago
You also gonna get bots as that was the intended purpose as it makes bot armies very expensive to keep, also to keep twitter afloat.

rsynnott 4y ago

Twitter blue users under the new system, generally, are paying for _attention_. Generally people who pay for attention are not worth giving attention to; their content is rarely worthwhile. Twitter blue acts as a sort of convenient filter heuristic; just filtering the lot out, you’re going to have a couple of false positives, but it’ll improve your experience. Attention is like sex; if you have to pay for it, the other participants probably aren’t enjoying it much.

bigbillheck 4y ago

The people who have paid-for bluechecks, by and large, seem to fall into a few different overlapping categories: 1. People promoting their own personal brand (including meme accounts and sex workers) 2. Musk stans 3. Crypto people 4. MAGA I'm willing to cut a break for some of the accounts in (1) on a case-by-case basis but I've seen all I care to see of (2), (3), and (4) so even if any given tweet from someone is innocuous--and they're not clearly in (1)--the bluecheck is a great signal to block.