Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikkergp | Hacker News Reader

Looks like they're making it even more exclusive:

`Not all previously verified accounts will get the “Official” label and the label is not available for purchase. Accounts that will receive it include government accounts, commercial companies, business partners, major media outlets, publishers and some public figures.`

Does anyone have any insight into how this is in line with Musk's recent tweet "Twitter’s current lords & peasants system for who has or doesn’t have a blue checkmark is bullshit."? At first glance it seems to go away from it, but maybe they'll explain it further on launch. Maybe it's because it introduces a "middle class" with the blue checkmark?

They were really leaning into the transparency angle for the blue check so I look forward to learning more how the "official" label will be allocated.

View on HN

Most of it sounds fine outside of the "some public figures".

What it needs its clear standards and no whiff of Twitter endorsing the account holder.

Government accounts and corporate accounts are pretty straight forward. Business partners seems unavoidable. Some room for debate over "major" media outlets, but honestly it won't hurt to apply it to as small a media outlet as is practical. I would definitely not give it to individual journalists.

The public figures, though, could easily just go back to the same problems if they don't watch it.

Someone mentioned it would be valuable to non profits as well. Given the inclusion of “public figures” is it any different (in writing) than it was before? Which means we seem to be back at the same place of the devil is in the details.

I'm curious how they're doing this on the backend. If the "blue check field" will be changed to the official field or if they'll swap them out. Makes me wonder what happens if they miss some code paths. Could be weird if there is some conflation on the backend.

Seems as though “official” is for things or groups, like your list of companies, govt depts etc. Where as the checkmark is for people. That line gets blurry when people are things, like influencers. Seems like before, the checkmark filled both of those roles and now it’s potentially going to be split.

I believe that the lords and peasants thing is about lack of clarity and consistency in how or who could get a checkmark. As the checkmark was, among other things, a status symbol for cool kids as well as a verification mark. The status symbol existing at least in part because it was ‘bestowed’.

Assuming that last paragraph, it would make sense in a certain way to ‘unload’ the checkmark into component parts and have a system for each.

Could a physical example be like an expo or business woman’s breakfast? Metropolis Business Expo, being a part of it said to be essential to doing business in metropolis, anyone can attend, vip passes given to friends of the organiser for backstage party but also for better stall location. Split stall location pass out of vip pass and sell vip pass for 8$. This impact the lord club that existed before as any peasant with 8$ gets to stink up the balcony cocktail party. Does that fit? Hopefully at least barely.

Musk cannot conceive that anyone, including even peasants, might not be able to waste an extra $8 per month. To him, that amount of money is infinitesimally small, he just can't process it. That, or he's just a liar.

I think its more that he sees Twitter as an investment in his time. Not a bad thought considering he used it to meme Tesla to its current market cap and himself to being the richest person in existence. For most people its just an idle passtime and there's no ROI to justify the $8. Influencers and such will benefit from it though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com