[jlawson]

No, you're confused. Those are suspensions. We're talking about removing the blue check mark or denying it. This happens to people who aren't morally-approved by Twitter for moral reasons.

For example, the blue check was removed from Milo Yiannopolous (the gay conservative provocateur who was canceled a few years ago), after he was previously verified.

Every "rule" on Twitter is no more than a tool used to create the appearance of left-wing consensus by suppressing alternative views through selective enforcement. Nothing is even-handed, and it's incredibly obvious when you're the target.

[riffic]

dirtbag leftists can't get blue checks and right wingers say "no one's being persecuted but us".

please move beyond this a bit and come to the understanding that every single thing Twitter does is arbitrary from rules enforcement, labeling, suspensions, etc. It's the nature of the service, and frankly boring at this point. We could talk more about why the business model sees this to continue (twitter can't disrupt its income stream and the rules that get enforced are those that allow Twitter to stay in business).

[ctdonath]

Interesting comparison: for the Left, you choose the qualifier “dirtbag” which presumably is a very small fraction of that faction ... while comparing that unpleasant small minority with the entire other half of the political spectrum.

I can (sort of, but would rather not) see denying authentication to problematic nutcases of any kind, and can see that edge case not pedantically covered/excluded by “nobody but us”. Sure, we can chalk up fringe cases to inconsistent boundaries of enforcement. But lumping in a plurality of users with edge cases is willful blindness to the blue check exclusion being official from-the-top policy, not mere erratic enforcement of vague rules by underpaid contractors.

Sure it’s boring if you’re not in the targeted plurality. It’s significant when Twitter is your only viable podium in the public town square, and anything you want to say that’s meaningfully & reasonably dissenting may get you kicked out because Twitter management is decidedly biased.

[thaumasiotes]

> while comparing that unpleasant small minority with the entire other half of the political spectrum.

These are verified:

https://twitter.com/McConnellPress

https://twitter.com/LeaderMcConnell

[riffic]

> Twitter is your only viable podium in the public town square

hah. Get a blog. this is a ridiculous assertion.

[ctdonath]

I’ve been blogging since before blogging was blogging. Personal blogs are now, on the whole, not viable.

Twitter is among the best platforms for being heard by the most people with the least cost/effort.

Yeah, I get your point - to wit “get your own press”, a line I’ve used long and often. Nonetheless I recognize the value of a place where a great many congregate to converse with many - and know the importance of that forum being neutral for the betterment of all, a truism Dorsey abandoned for the worse.

[jazzyjackson]

> only viable podium in the public town square

the vast majority of the Public (let’s say 90%) never looks at twitter, let alone whatever corner some drama is happening in

as far as getting media coverage (nightly news has even fewer eyeballs) you can do just as well sending out a press release

the greatest trick jack dorsey ever pulled was convincing certain people his platform is somehow indispensable