The irony is that it was the pre-musk system that was deceptive. Previously bluechecks where given out capriciously at the whim of staff, including to people w

The irony is that it was the pre-musk system that was deceptive. Previously bluechecks where given out capriciously at the whim of staff, including to people with no particular merit other than that they paid substantial bribes. Now its just a publicly documented feature denoting people who have paid accounts. One could debate if the opaque and graft laden former system was more or less useful on the whole (on account of the inappropriate awards due to corrupting being relatively rare), but I think there isn't a serious argument that the current system is deceptive or that the former system wasn't deceptive. In that light, I think it's difficult to not view this action as retaliation for removal of a feature which granted the EU a more substantial platform for spreading their own influence materials than they'd otherwise have, which they have absolutely no legal basis to demand, and where any such mandate would violate X's free speech rights.