There's been a big effort to block anybody with a blue checkmark since any major story or viral post will have them automatically bumped up to the top of the replies. So, when the whiners started complaining, he started openly considering this.
He will end up "compromising".
You can block people, but only people without blue check marks.
Wanna harass someone, wanna be a troll, subscribe to Twitter blue and you can't be blocked...
Aren't there different twitter tiers, too? Like, blue and gold? I wonder if you'll only be allowed to block people in your tier and below, so that unpaid accounts can't block anybody
IIRC the gold checkmarks are reserved for big corporate accounts that want it, and Twitter demands $1000/mo for that. Incredible.
Yeah, imagine how much value he'd be adding to the gold checkmark by restricting who could block them
Honestly, I don't think that's a problem. Twitter always got its money from people paying to show you stuff you didn't want to see. So what if the ads are now tweets?
After he got boosted up to a level where anyone was only getting Elon in their feeds despite of the topic, a lot of people blocked his ass. So he is now getting rid of the block feature because everybody should be reading Elon's all bangers, all the time.
there’s no way he doesn’t retain a true block feature for himself, of course
Surely there'd be a way for him to get someone to manually unblock his account if his ego'sbeen hit that much.
Though that being said that'd require staff to do so...
The article is a bit misleading. He wants to get rid of block for stronger mute as you can get around block by logging out.
The counter argument is that block is still useful because I block someone I want zero interaction with that person and people are too lazy to log out anyway so it kinda works in practice.
I'm not sure why is he stirring shit up. The block feature is on point with free speech philosophy he trying to push. If anything he should be making blocking etc. More powerful.
It's never been really about free speech. It's about elevating his speech. He believes he has a right to be listened to.
The further it goes the more it feels like this. It's almost like conservatives don't have a consistent philosophy about anything.
They do, though. It's called FĂĽhrerprinzip, or "the leader principle".
The ideology of the FĂĽhrerprinzip sees each organization as a hierarchy of leaders, where every leader (FĂĽhrer, in German) has absolute responsibility in his own area, demands absolute obedience from those below him, and answers only to his superiors.
In this view, absolutely everything in society must be made authoritarian. Cooperative and democratic forms of social organization are considered corrosive to social order, and therefore are not allowed. Disrespecting your Führer — any of your Führers, at any level — must be punished, with penalties up to & including death.
If there is a social organization at any level — a family, a church, a workplace, a school, a local government — it must have a Führer to take responsibility for it, and everyone else involved must obey that Führer unquestioningly. Anything else is social chaos and probably Communism.
Children and wives obey the man of the house, who is wholly responsible for them. If the man of the house fails to enforce order (that is, compliance with his own FĂĽhrers), then his own FĂĽhrers must remove him from that responsibility. For instance, if a child deviates from the state governor's dictates on gender, that child must be removed from his father's home and placed into a more obedient home.
Workers obey bosses and business owners. Worker-owned enterprises are not allowed as they are obviously Communism. Unions are wrong, as they exist to second-guess the will of the business's FĂĽhrer for his workers. Moreover, it is the job of each business leader to bring his business into line with the dictates of higher FĂĽhrers. Businesses that fail to obey the economic and cultural dictates of the FĂĽhrer must be punished; see e.g. Disney.
Students obey teachers, who obey principals, who obey the state governor. If a teacher fails to demand that children fall in line with the directives passed down from the state governor, it is the duty of the principal to not only fire that teacher, but report them for prosecution.
Actually he wants to get rid of "blocking public posts"
Huh why ? This doesn't make sense
There's been a big effort to block anybody with a blue checkmark since any major story or viral post will have them automatically bumped up to the top of the replies. So, when the whiners started complaining, he started openly considering this.
He will end up "compromising".
You can block people, but only people without blue check marks.
Wanna harass someone, wanna be a troll, subscribe to Twitter blue and you can't be blocked...
Aren't there different twitter tiers, too? Like, blue and gold? I wonder if you'll only be allowed to block people in your tier and below, so that unpaid accounts can't block anybody
IIRC the gold checkmarks are reserved for big corporate accounts that want it, and Twitter demands $1000/mo for that. Incredible.
Yeah, imagine how much value he'd be adding to the gold checkmark by restricting who could block them
Honestly, I don't think that's a problem. Twitter always got its money from people paying to show you stuff you didn't want to see. So what if the ads are now tweets?
After he got boosted up to a level where anyone was only getting Elon in their feeds despite of the topic, a lot of people blocked his ass. So he is now getting rid of the block feature because everybody should be reading Elon's all bangers, all the time.
there’s no way he doesn’t retain a true block feature for himself, of course
Surely there'd be a way for him to get someone to manually unblock his account if his ego'sbeen hit that much.
Though that being said that'd require staff to do so...
The article is a bit misleading. He wants to get rid of block for stronger mute as you can get around block by logging out.
The counter argument is that block is still useful because I block someone I want zero interaction with that person and people are too lazy to log out anyway so it kinda works in practice.
I'm not sure why is he stirring shit up. The block feature is on point with free speech philosophy he trying to push. If anything he should be making blocking etc. More powerful.
It's never been really about free speech. It's about elevating his speech. He believes he has a right to be listened to.
The further it goes the more it feels like this. It's almost like conservatives don't have a consistent philosophy about anything.
They do, though. It's called FĂĽhrerprinzip, or "the leader principle".
Wikipedia says:
In this view, absolutely everything in society must be made authoritarian. Cooperative and democratic forms of social organization are considered corrosive to social order, and therefore are not allowed. Disrespecting your Führer — any of your Führers, at any level — must be punished, with penalties up to & including death.
If there is a social organization at any level — a family, a church, a workplace, a school, a local government — it must have a Führer to take responsibility for it, and everyone else involved must obey that Führer unquestioningly. Anything else is social chaos and probably Communism.
Children and wives obey the man of the house, who is wholly responsible for them. If the man of the house fails to enforce order (that is, compliance with his own FĂĽhrers), then his own FĂĽhrers must remove him from that responsibility. For instance, if a child deviates from the state governor's dictates on gender, that child must be removed from his father's home and placed into a more obedient home.
Workers obey bosses and business owners. Worker-owned enterprises are not allowed as they are obviously Communism. Unions are wrong, as they exist to second-guess the will of the business's FĂĽhrer for his workers. Moreover, it is the job of each business leader to bring his business into line with the dictates of higher FĂĽhrers. Businesses that fail to obey the economic and cultural dictates of the FĂĽhrer must be punished; see e.g. Disney.
Students obey teachers, who obey principals, who obey the state governor. If a teacher fails to demand that children fall in line with the directives passed down from the state governor, it is the duty of the principal to not only fire that teacher, but report them for prosecution.
Actually he wants to get rid of "blocking public posts"