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?
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?