- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
They can’t even be proud of their decision to lick the boot. I’d call them worms but that would be an insult to the worms.
Never been a Twitter - or “X” - user, but:
Isn’t it the whole point to show everyone your blue check mark that you have been approved or something like that? How else would one know that you are the real deal?
That was the original purpose of the checkmark, but Elon took them away from everybody who didn’t pay for Blue or corporate verification (and didn’t have over a million followers at the time) and started giving them to everybody who paid for Blue and added a phone number.
So now the checkmark just means they are paying for “X.” Of course, I’m sure some people are now ashamed that they’re paying, so they have the option to hide it now.
Thank you for clarifying.
You’re welcome. Unfortunately, I’m still on the former birdsite because of the artists I’m friends with on the platform.
Bet Elon wanted this because people kept blocking anyone with the blue checkmark, and the people that paid for it kept crying about being blocked.
That’s fantastic.
What’s next, a Honda logo to hide the logo on their Tesla?
I was surprised they didn’t roll this out from the jump, I bet they could have gotten a lot more accounts to do it on the dl. But now everyone is pot committed to blue checks being cringe or not.
So I guess now you can get your tweets pushed without disclosing that you payed for it…?
That must be the true reason behind this move
Is this actually legal?
Twitter can do whatever the hell they want on their own website. They have no obligation to be fair in whatever they decide to boost or hide (with the exception of outright illegal content, obviously).
I am asking myself the same thing. But unless it’s actually advertising I guess the answer is yes.
Might get interesting with twitter gold or whatever color the brand checkmate is.
Why were you asking yourself that. How would it possibly be illegal?
How would that be illegal? What law in which country would have anything to do with how a privately owned company handles that?
Ah that makes more sense.
They’re Xes, not tweets.
That’s a bingo
“We just say bingo”
Yeah, that’s definitely a point. I was thinking about advertising.
They were bullied too much ahahahahahah my goodness
Bro I love bullying the chuds, magas and domestic terrorists.
But when you see a reply from a small account with few interactions high up under a popular post, you’re still going to know it’s a paying simp.
It’s like putting a clown nose whilst wearing your nazi uniform. People can still see the uniform, but now they also think you’re a clown.
What snowflakes
Hide your shame? Not sure who this appeals to.
when you are too much of a little cunt to own up to the fact that you paid money for that cocksucker.
Why the hell would anyone buy twitter blue if they wanted to hide their checks, the stupidity of Elon lmao.
This is hilarious. Thank God I never made an account on that cesspool.
I was either on my last slide phone or my first smart phone when Twitter came out and Facebook was beginning it’s ascent to late 2000s domination.
From the beginning, I thought the concept of effectively posting text messages on this new Twitter thing made no sense at all, so I never bothered making an account.
However many years later, I’m super glad I thought Twitter v1.0 was so silly.
You mean you didn’t want to spend 10-20 cents per tweet and per reply to you and from you to share 140 characters a pop to the internet?
Glad I wasn’t the only one.
Shit never made sense to me either.
I was head of an IT department at the time and distinctly remember telling everyone in a team meeting that this “micro-blogging” was pointless, going nowhere and we should ignore it. Wrong!
Think the only thing you were wrong about was “going nowhere”.
Unfortunately a lot of people like doing pointless things that they should ignore.
Now why would they want to do that, seems odd. Wouldnt they want to show they are supporting the free speech (their CEO says this is the case) platform, what would it gain you to hide this badge?
I believe you get some premium features along with the subscribtion which probably is the main reason people are paying for it though I’m sure some just want the blue tick too.
why hide it in this case then, you got your features (some seem to think that being able to push their messages and have them at the top is the one a lot are going for that want to have the blue tick removed) what would be your reason to be like I dont need people to see that.
You get to keep the premium features even if you hide the blue checkmark. There’s no downside to it.
Then you are saying there is an upside to it. Why would hiding that your posts are promoted and your comments come first has an upside if you wernt trying to game some system?
No, I said there’s no downside to it.
https://kbin.social/m/[email protected]/t/281834/Twitter-Blue-subscribers-can-now-hide-their-blue-checks#entry-comment-1290301
(https://kbin.social/u/countsickness)[countsickness] So I guess now you can get your tweets pushed without disclosing that you payed for it…?Again this still feels like they are dishonestly trying to achieve something. Is there another app out there like this that allows this kind of option?
twitter blue subscribers can now hide the entire reason they spent money on it in the first place
https://kbin.social/m/[email protected]/t/281834/Twitter-Blue-subscribers-can-now-hide-their-blue-checks#entry-comment-1290301
this comment has quite a reasonable explanation. Your posts are boosted without you disclosing you paid for it.
well that explains why whenever i look at a tweet i have to scroll past all the top comments which are inevitably the stupidest ones
Also it let’s Elon pretend that more people are subbed than really are. We know he likes to inflate the perception of whose willing to pay for it after he gave out a bunch of free checks to celebrities who refused to sign up
Well that sounds terrible. At least with the blue logo you can just hide or block their posts to get to the organic engagement.
yeah, seems like now it will be very difficult to weed them out… just another reason to go away from twitter
Knowing how well Twitter is being maintained, there’s likely going to be something left in the code to give Blue people away
And if so, the blocker I have on PC will find them and block them still.
Oh I see, the blue checks have become a direct competition to bot farms. I think I’d rather give the money to a bunch of soulless machines than a soulless human.
They’re probably tired of the harassment they’re getting for paying for it. A lot of the blue check tweets I’ve seen have a comment section mocking and berating them. I think it’s a shame they get to hide it. If they paid for it they should deal with the harassment that goes with it.
Seems like they’re getting the “freedom of speech” they paid for.
I personally think subscribtion model is better than ads so mocking these people seems kinda odd
I agree with this sentiment but I think the real issue with this change is that Twitter Blue subscribers get their content’s visibility boosted. Without the blue checkmark visible, it’s impossible to tell who had their content boosted through organic engagement, and who paid for it
The Twitter Blue subscribers are not getting mocked for paying to remove ads. They are mocked for paying money to have their voices cary more weight. And they are paying that money to a company that as of late has supported CSAM, racism, and vaccine disinformation.
Right. And now, going into an election year where misinformation is growing in weight and volume, we will have no idea who’s artificially boosting their content.
Also, it means that every single breaking news tweet, who are you going to see first? All the dick riders who paid for Blue, which slants a very particular demographic’s way.
2024 is going to be a nightmare.
deleted by creator
What’s the difference between paying to get your tweets seen and paying to get your tweets seen?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Do blue checks not see ads? I agree, when a service is subscription/donation only, it’s way better. But if any part of the business model is ad based, it’s shit, and paying to hide them won’t make it any better.
they see “half” ads >_>
no joke
Imagine paying and still seeing ads… smh
Well that’s incredibly stupid. Removing ads is usually the reason I’m paying for a service. Ironic that I as a non-paying user see less ads than the ones that are paying for it.
