[gluelogic]

Removing his blue check was especially ridiculous to me. "Because you are who you are, you can no longer be verified."

[scholia]

If you're Verified, you have access to a Verified Twitter stream, which means you can avoid seeing anything from people who are not verified.

This provides a civilized version of Twitter that is mostly populated by smart and funny people.

So Twitter removed a professional jerk from the Verified streams while allowing him to continue as a rabble-rouser.

[gluelogic]

So Twitter's verification is more about access to this socially elitist feed? That may be a feature, but I think the primary function is to avoid people impersonating well-known public figures on the platform.

Removing Milo's check out of politically-driven spite definitely undermines the validity of the entire verification system.

[scholia]

I didn't say it was the primary feature. I simply pointed out that verification wasn't as simple as is generally assumed.

> Removing Milo's check out of politically-driven spite definitely undermines the validity of the entire verification system.

That sounds like a prejudiced opinion expressed in prejudicial language. However, you might consider this section from I’m With The Banned

https://medium.com/welcome-to-the-scream-room/im-with-the-ba...

QUOTE >>

Milo is excited. This is his night. How does he feel about his suspension?

“It’s fantastic,” he says, “It’s the end of the platform. The timing is perfect.”

He was planning for something like this. “I thought I had another six months, but this was always going to happen.”

Milo shows no remorse for the avalanche of misconduct he helped direct towards Leslie Jones, who is just the latest victim of the recreational ritual abuse he likes to launch at women and minorities for the fame and fun of it.

[michaelbuddy]

> Milo shows no remorse for the avalanche of misconduct he helped direct towards Leslie Jones.

He shows no remorse because she clearly didn't suffer from anything he said. Like I said before. Other people actually harassed, he didn't. Trolling a celebrity star of a bad movie isn't harassment by any measure. His comments were intelligent and funny. His article on Breitbart was scathing, which is why Jack targeted him, to set an example.

Also stated before, She was happy to leverage it for publicity. So much for being traumatized. And another thing, Milo doesn't launch abuse at Minorities. In fact, since he's in love with british black men, your comment has no value there because you're clearly uninformed on his background.

Milo attacks ideas and does sophisticated trolling. Judging by Twitter's crashing stock price right when this incident occurred, it can't be denied that Twitter's censoring of an minor media celebrity proved it made a bad move. So much so, Jack's been trying to put out the fire, even where he addressed it for a canned question during the investor phone call. He just wants it to go away.

[scholia]

> His comments were intelligent and funny.

So, you've been suckered by an obvious troll.

> In fact, since he's in love with british black men, your comment has no value there because you're clearly uninformed on his background.

You're funny. OK, answer these questions:

1) Where was Milo born? 2) What was his birth name? 3) What does his father do for a living?

I have another dozen if you get any of those right.

One of us knows Milo and it isn't you ;-)

[dabockster]

> This provides a civilized version of Twitter that is mostly populated by smart and funny people.

Twitter circa 2009 before Kutcher vs CNN? This still exists?

[scholia]

Only if you are Verified ;-)

I did suggest some time ago that Twitter could monetize by charging a high fee for verification (with, say, passport scans and other personal details). Sadly, they do it free.