4 ms·

This would seem to be entirely about how different parties view blue checks. There's no law that says a blue check next to a name comes with any kind of guaran

This would seem to be entirely about how different parties view blue checks. There's no law that says a blue check next to a name comes with any kind of guarantee. Unless X has language somewhere about what "verified" actually connotes beyond the simplest interpretation of the word, I don't see what the action is here.

Krasnol 2y ago
The action results from the fact that the blue check used to mean something.
- dragontamer 2y ago
  It still does mean something. The fact that cryptoscams and other such people are using blue-checkmarks to trick others today on Twitter is proof of the dark pattern. What is the point of a "verification" system that lets scammers in? Obviously the scammers find the $8/month blue checkmark to be worthy enough to spend. There was that one Russian Bot account people were making fun of that ran out of ChatGPT tokens with a blue checkmark as well. So you're getting bots and scammers in on the "verified" mark (and Twitter is literally profiting from them by taking their money). I think that's worthy to call attention in some countries. EU doesn't like this kind of stuff for example. So I'm not surprised to see EU action on this situation alone.
  - sunaookami 2y ago
    >The fact that cryptoscams and other such people are using blue-checkmarks to trick others today on Twitter is proof of the dark pattern That already has happened way before Musk took over. Nothing changed. At least now people are more wary that blue checkmark doesn't mean "I can trust this user".
    - dragontamer 2y ago
      No. Today cryptocoin scams have blue checkmarks when before they didn't. That's why 'Elon Musk airdrop cryptocoin' message is basically today's Nigerian Prince scam. If you can get a blue checkmark for just $8 and call yourself Elon Musk (or any other celebrity), you'll easily make more money on the scam than you spend on a throwaway account.
      - sunaookami 2y ago
        >No. Today cryptocoin scams have blue checkmarks when before they didn't. They also had blue checks before. I know this because I use Twitter for over 10 years now.
        dragontamer 2y ago
        But they weren't able to have a blue checkmark while impersonating celebrities.
zerocrates 2y ago
I'd want to see what the actual claim is; all we have here is a short little statement that doesn't really clarify exactly what they're taking issue with on Verified. A narrow objection along your "simplest interpretation" lines, that Twitter really doesn't verify anything anymore about someone being who they say they are, I could see that potentially being upheld (though presumably easily fixable by not saying "Verified" and changing the icon to an X or whatever).
- mullingitover 2y ago
  > A narrow objection along your "simplest interpretation" lines, that Twitter really doesn't verify anything anymore about someone being who they say they are It's a very valid point to take them to task on: Twitter users are 'Verified' in the same way Teslas are 'Fully Self Driving™': Not at all, and arguably named in a way intended to mislead consumers and give them a false sense of confidence in the product/service.

Krasnol 2y ago

The action results from the fact that the blue check used to mean something.

dragontamer 2y ago
It still does mean something. The fact that cryptoscams and other such people are using blue-checkmarks to trick others today on Twitter is proof of the dark pattern. What is the point of a "verification" system that lets scammers in? Obviously the scammers find the $8/month blue checkmark to be worthy enough to spend. There was that one Russian Bot account people were making fun of that ran out of ChatGPT tokens with a blue checkmark as well. So you're getting bots and scammers in on the "verified" mark (and Twitter is literally profiting from them by taking their money). I think that's worthy to call attention in some countries. EU doesn't like this kind of stuff for example. So I'm not surprised to see EU action on this situation alone.
- sunaookami 2y ago
  >The fact that cryptoscams and other such people are using blue-checkmarks to trick others today on Twitter is proof of the dark pattern That already has happened way before Musk took over. Nothing changed. At least now people are more wary that blue checkmark doesn't mean "I can trust this user".
  - dragontamer 2y ago
    No. Today cryptocoin scams have blue checkmarks when before they didn't. That's why 'Elon Musk airdrop cryptocoin' message is basically today's Nigerian Prince scam. If you can get a blue checkmark for just $8 and call yourself Elon Musk (or any other celebrity), you'll easily make more money on the scam than you spend on a throwaway account.
    - sunaookami 2y ago
      >No. Today cryptocoin scams have blue checkmarks when before they didn't. They also had blue checks before. I know this because I use Twitter for over 10 years now.
      - dragontamer 2y ago
        But they weren't able to have a blue checkmark while impersonating celebrities.

zerocrates 2y ago

I'd want to see what the actual claim is; all we have here is a short little statement that doesn't really clarify exactly what they're taking issue with on Verified. A narrow objection along your "simplest interpretation" lines, that Twitter really doesn't verify anything anymore about someone being who they say they are, I could see that potentially being upheld (though presumably easily fixable by not saying "Verified" and changing the icon to an X or whatever).

mullingitover 2y ago
> A narrow objection along your "simplest interpretation" lines, that Twitter really doesn't verify anything anymore about someone being who they say they are It's a very valid point to take them to task on: Twitter users are 'Verified' in the same way Teslas are 'Fully Self Driving™': Not at all, and arguably named in a way intended to mislead consumers and give them a false sense of confidence in the product/service.