This doesn't really change anything, as far as I can see.
The entire premise is wrong. Being verified on Twitter SHOULD NOT BE AN OPTION AT ALL because of the perverse incentives it creates, and the way it warps and destroys the whole platform.
The blue checkmark program started out as simply a way to prove you were the real you, if you were claiming to be someone important. But because of that element of "importance," it's become a mark of royalty. Blue checkmarks are the lords and masters of Twitter, largely exempt from its many abuses, because they're Very Important People. All the rest of the peasants on Twitter have to content themselves with the privilege of trodding the same digital ground as such majesty. One law for them, another for us.
Escaping from this kind of diseased thinking was a large part of the appeal of the early Internet, but now those who enjoy such perverse games are hell-bent on forcing them on everyone else. Every blue checkmark is another "Then let them eat cake!" hurled from the high parapets, a boot stomping on the face of the ordinary internet user forever. The only "good" social network site (and really the only good forum in general) is one where real names are banned. But of course that would hurt monetization, and interfere with constant surveillance by corporations and government. So we get this crap instead. The blue checkmark is incredible, because it manages to sum up, in one tiny, instantly recognizable icon, everything that is wrong with the "new" Internet.
> The only "good" social network site (and really the only good forum in general) is one where real names are banned.
Not just this but any identity markers like gender or age. This is the only way to get people to face uncomfortable ideas, when they can’t dismiss it because “oh it’s a man/woman, of course they would say that”.
What really is "verification" in that case? "The user is legally entitled to use this string of letters to designate themselves"?
The notability mark is useful: it means you're following basketball star Michael Jordan, which is probably what you meant. If you actually wanted to follow your brother-in-law Michael Jordan or a law professor Michael Jordan, there's really no simple binary mark that will help you separate them from each other. You'll have to do your research.
You can do also research on The Real Elon Musk Who Has Billions Of Dollars And Isn't Giving Any Of Them To You, and I honestly don't know if there's any way to help people who can't figure that out. But I could see Twitter at least wanting to try to help save people from themselves, because the bell curve has two tails.
Other than that... I'm not sure what any kind of verification really does. Maybe a dating app can help save you from wasting your time, because the whole point is that you're meeting strangers, some of whom will be bad people who get booted repeatedly. That's a completely different use case.
Look at a celebrity’s post, and the top comments are other famous peoples (social media handlers) blue check comments at the top with exponentially more likes than any authentic fans comment
The entire premise is wrong. Being verified on Twitter SHOULD NOT BE AN OPTION AT ALL because of the perverse incentives it creates, and the way it warps and destroys the whole platform.
The blue checkmark program started out as simply a way to prove you were the real you, if you were claiming to be someone important. But because of that element of "importance," it's become a mark of royalty. Blue checkmarks are the lords and masters of Twitter, largely exempt from its many abuses, because they're Very Important People. All the rest of the peasants on Twitter have to content themselves with the privilege of trodding the same digital ground as such majesty. One law for them, another for us.
Escaping from this kind of diseased thinking was a large part of the appeal of the early Internet, but now those who enjoy such perverse games are hell-bent on forcing them on everyone else. Every blue checkmark is another "Then let them eat cake!" hurled from the high parapets, a boot stomping on the face of the ordinary internet user forever. The only "good" social network site (and really the only good forum in general) is one where real names are banned. But of course that would hurt monetization, and interfere with constant surveillance by corporations and government. So we get this crap instead. The blue checkmark is incredible, because it manages to sum up, in one tiny, instantly recognizable icon, everything that is wrong with the "new" Internet.