The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
- Status
Soldato
Really? You're going to pay $8? The only way that happens is of they make the free service so spammed with ads and irrelevant content on your feed that you feel you have zero choice. At which point its a paid service for everyone.
Soldato
I'm not. I don't use Twitter for that. But there are huge numbers of people that do use it for that, its been the best free marketing tool for them for a long time, and they'll happily pay the $8.
Musk isn't going to suddenly make the free tier for average users ****. It needs paid members and your basic users to keep the whole thing going
Last edited:
Nope, you seem to be ignoring that or are ignorant of the real issues here - there are plenty of non-verified accounts with thousands of followers who end up with cloned accounts trying to rip people off with crypto scams etc.. the current setup is very bad at dealing with this the only verification system in place is very opaque and seems to dish out blue checks to obscure journalists with say a few hundred followers while leaving some fairly big accounts that have been targeted in this way multiple times unverified.
But the ego thing is what this removes! If literally, anyone can pay for verification then...
It doesn't mean that you add something of value to twitter though, it's an opaque system and there are some quite bizarre "verified" accounts that don't really add any value at all. How does opening it up mean it means nothing? If you open it up then you extend verification to a broader range of users, that should be a good thing when trying to tackle impersonators, spammers etc.. In fact, if adding value is a concern then a system of users paying for verification but also Twitter paying creators who do add value should leave those users who actually do add value in net profit! And indeed those who derive significant value from networking, replying directly to various people etc.. might find it useful to pay.
People are happy to pay quite a lot of LinkedIn perks, the principle of paying more for additional utility on a social network already happens in practice.
You seem to be defending it as a status symbol rather than the utility of verifying accounts as that's the thing that's disappearing with this change.
Last edited:
Soldato
Exactly. Why is that concept so hard to accept? The reason the blue tick exists is to solve a problem for the big users. Now those big users are going to get charged so twitter can solve the problem, but in turn making it worse.
Surely the idea of charging for a blue tick should be sold on one major thing only, and that is that it "should" reduce the anonymous users that post bile in twitter comments, as if they are paying £8 per month and then get banned, they've lost that money. Bots won't be paying the money if they get banned after 1 day, and so if there becomes a mode of 'hide all non blue tick users' then it should in theory, mean someone like stephan King, will have a better experience with better users.
There is perhaps a mistake by using the blue ticks users as the ones who get the charge.
It should be something like a green tick, which is in addition to the blue tick that notable users get.
But I will say it again, charging someone to create content is just bat **** crazy on a site that is nothing but user created content. Youtune doesn't do this, tiktok doesn't do this. Instagram/Facebook and a million others, don't do this for a very good reason.
YouTube does optionally charge the users to view content, but never do they charge content creators to create content.
Last edited:
Soldato
And those accounts should pay to solve that problem that twitter has of course
Soldato
It really isn't. It's a marketing platform essentially, it makes total sense for brands, companies and individuals gaining business from it to pay a monthly fee.
They keep leeching out from their SC echo chambers.OcUK Woke Squad:
Or can be called the anti-Dowie brigade.
Soldato
Some examples of accounts that are verified that you think shouldn't be? Welcome to the world of cyrpto, its filled with scams, scams and crypto go hand in hand.
No it doesn't. People will pay because of their ego to get that mark. Though in the end it will likely become worthless but at the start people will pay to get it for ego.
If millions of accounts become verified then how do you pick the wheat from the chaff? Check mark isn't a given that the account is useful but its something. If millions have it its worthless.
Soldato
Look at their content perhaps?
People still don't seem to be grasping that a) no one *has* to pay to use/post on twitter and b) the people who actually add value; the big content creators will likely be making a net profit from this.
Soldato
So you never look to see if an account is verified? If millions are verified then its worthless to me. Unless he then adds a second layers of marks to the accounts that are currently verified so the useful accounts stand out. In which case nothing has really changed other than people now pay for their account as people will ignore the new check mark and look for the other one. Something need to make the accounts that currently stand out stand out when millions have the mark. If millions sign up that is. I'm not convinced they will but I'm sure he's hoping they will.
Soldato
I follow loads of accounts with 10/20k followers that aren't verified.
Example
Any account that wants to be! That is the point, increase verification and reduce scams, spam etc.
People will pay because of their ego even though the very fact that opening this thing up to everyone removes the status symbol effect???
I mean they can if they like, no one is stopping them from paying for it even if they won't personally derive any utility from it (aren't a target for scammers, won't use the new features etc..) but so what? Is that an issue?
See there it is again, you're defending it as a status symbol rather than the utility of verifying people.
Last edited:
Soldato
I'd be very suprised if millions and millions of people will suddenly start paying $8 a month where the user has like 500 followers and doesn't use twitter for business marketing
Last edited:
Soldato
Everyone has grasped that you don't have to pay dowie, only you are trying to make out that is an issue. Where is this magic money coming from dowie? Its reported Musk needs to find around $1.3b a year extra revenue to make a profit. To pay these accounts he need to make a profit and a healthy one if he's got 1000s, maybe 10s of 1000s of accounts to pay. So where is he making that money from?
Soldato
Can we agree that tying these changes to the blue tick is a mistake?
It could very easily have been a whole new tick/symbol, especially given this is nothing like what the blue tick was for and still could be for.
Soldato
and? Of course its a status symbol. Lots of users use that blue tick as a gauge to whether the account is trustworthy. Not every user is going to trawl through an accounts history to see if the account is trustworthy or not. In fact I would say 90% of users aren't going to do that.
Now if you want to argue that every user should be forced to ID themselves to get an account I could get on board with that. Not use their real name to the public but have an ID verified account with twitter. That would stop the bots, spam and some of the scammers.
Soldato
I'm not sure, perhaps. There is no reason you couldn't have different types of verifaction. But the guy has only been in charge less than a week, i'm sure he's thought of that very thing, that you could have levels to it. The guys isn't dumb
Soldato
Exactly this. I've no problem wih people paying for an account and getting some status symbol to say they are. However if they have the same symbol as the current verified accounts its worse than useless it actually makes the site much worse.
- Status