Scenes from the ongoing Twitter debacle that is #JeSuisMilo

If the blue check mark is simply a privilege than I would have no problem with twitter giving or taking them away for any reason whatsoever. But if the blue check mark is there to protect the identities of notable people, then I don’t think twitter should take that away for violating the T.O.S.

The blue check mark isn’t there to protect the identities of notable people. The blue check mark is there to protect brands, or more accurately to protect Twitter from being sued by the owners of those brands when people mischeviously impersonate them.

It also gets applied to humans, but if you look at Twitter’s FAQ on the subject it makes it plain that it’s there to protect “highly sought users in music, acting, fashion, government, politics, religion, journalism, media, sports, business and other key interest areas.” People with the money and the motivation to use lawyers in order to protect their brands, in other words.

They extended it to Yiannopoulos as a courtesy, and it got taken away again because he acted with discourtesy.

Now let’s discuss something more interesting: What are your motives for coming here and discussing this with us? You evidently feel extremely strongly about this topic, strongly enough to join a website you’ve never commented on before and will probably not remain on afterwards. This isn’t just a case of “someone is wrong on the internet”; this is the behaviour of someone who takes this personally.

Tell me about that, because that human factor is vastly more interesting than anything else you’ve said. Why do you take it personally? And why do you come here to discuss it, rather than (say) Breitbart, where Yiannopoulos’s fans can be found in greater number?

http://i.imgur.com/ZcEhEti.gif

Annoyed Bowie does not approve of the sealion.

@ Ben

To continue the pub landlord analogy.

Let’s say I misbehave in the pub. As a result the landlord says I’m no longer allowed to take part in lock ins (a privilege extended to a select few drinkers).

I’m outraged and think it would have been better to bar me. Well, the landlord will no doubt point out no one is forcing me to drink there.

So, if Milo believes losing his tick is too harsh and suspension would be more appropriate, he’s free to stop using Twitter.

I kinda wonder if “Why did Twitter unverify Milo when he broke more than enough rules to be permabanned?!” is really the smartest party line for Ben and his #Gater bros to push here…

I mean, sure, it does make Twitter look bad, but in the polar opposite direction to the way they want.

Ben Cohen:

You and I could spot a badly constructed fake Charlie Sheen account with seven followers; I’m not sure I could spot a well done fake account with several hundred followers. Twitter instituted the blue tick for a reason, and it wasn’t to honor Milo or anyone else for being great people. They instituted the blue tick to protect the identity of notable people.

No, you are wrong. They didn’t institute the blue tick to protect the identity of notable people. From Twitter:

Twitter verifies accounts on an ongoing basis to make it easier for users to find who they’re looking for.

It’s a convenience to make it easier. EEEEEAAAASSSSIIIIEEEERRRRRR! It’s not protection. So comparing it to the secret service is ridiculously stupid. It’s a convenience, and a privilege.

As I said earlier, you are applying your own wishes to the blue check mark.

And this proves google is flawless? Then I guess nobody needs a blue-tick.

Correct! Nobody needs a blue tick! It’s a convenience. And twitter even offers alternatives methods to make it easier for people to confirm the authenticity of their twitter account:

Besides verification, how can I show my account is authentic?

Linking to your Twitter profile from an official website is the easiest way to confirm the authenticity of your Twitter account. Including Twitter’s follow button on your webpage is the absolute best way to do this. Click here to learn how. Or, visit all help articles about linking to your Twitter account from your blog or website here.

So see? Milo can do that and people will know his account is the real Milo.

Ben Cohen (again):

I also don’t get secret service protection. Celebrities are the target of all sorts of crap to a much greater degree than normal people, that is why twitter has this policy.

Nope, again, you are applying your own desires to twitter.

Also, the second hit was @voxday so if Milo takes issue with being impersonated I’m sure he’ll report that account to Twitter and write an article denouncing that Twitter handle, right?

Well, Ben WAS concerned that Neo-Nazis would make Milo look bad…though somehow just associating with them isn’t enough to tarnish a reputation.

I think we actually succeeded in driving him off. Good job, team.

EJ,

What you more or less admit is that I am correct the main purpose for verification. It is to verify that a notable person, institution, or company is who they say they are. The argument is repetitive because people refuse to accept what is staring them directly in the face, you even admit it.

The blue check mark isn’t there to protect the identities of notable people. The blue check mark is there to protect brands, or more accurately to protect Twitter from being sued by the owners of those brands when people mischeviously impersonate them.

This is precisely what I have been saying. Twitter didn’t put it in place simply because the twitter CEO is a really, nice, helpful guy or gal, twitter is responsible for the content that they host. When people are spoofing celebrities and corporations, they could potentially be sued.

I also think twitter has a responsibility to protect the identities of famous people, (yes they have a responsibility to protect everyone’s identity but average people are not subject to the same level of threat).

Now let’s discuss something more interesting: What are your motives for coming here and discussing this with us? You evidently feel extremely strongly about this topic, strongly enough to join a website you’ve never commented on before and will probably not remain on afterwards. This isn’t just a case of “someone is wrong on the internet”; this is the behaviour of someone who takes this personally.

To a large extent, we are our reputations, and when we are dead that is all that will be left. In this particular case Milo is encouraging his supporters to spoof him, but that doesn’t change how I feel about twitter’s decision.

What happened to Ben Garrison bothered me on a visceral level. Imagine if the Westboro Baptist Church created a fake twitter account with your name, and started posting homophobic screeds for lulz.

Twitter shouldn’t be treating identity protection as a privilege to be taken away for vague “terms of service” violations. Twitter never revealed what Milo did, specifically, to lose his verification.

One more thing that I find viscerally disturbing: People who treat any form of disagreement as trolling. My initial post was completely polite and civil, and for it I got called a troll. People who respond to disagreement that way are close-minded, stupid, and bigoted, and they piss me off. Do you like bigots? Because I don’t.

Alan Robertshaw,

To continue the pub landlord analogy.

Let’s say I misbehave in the pub. As a result the landlord says I’m no longer allowed to take part in lock ins (a privilege extended to a select few drinkers).

I’m outraged and think it would have been better to bar me. Well, the landlord will no doubt point out no one is forcing me to drink there.

So, if Milo believes losing his tick is too harsh and suspension would be more appropriate, he’s free to stop using Twitter.

A lockin is something the pub owner put in place for “preferred customers,” i.e. well-behaved regulars. Verification was put in place, as EJ pointed out, to protect the identity of corporations and famous people. So it isn’t simply a privilege, an endorsement, or an honorific.

“Twitter’s Faq: Why does Twitter verify accounts?
Verification is currently used to establish authenticity of identities of key individuals and brands on Twitter.”

As other’s have pointed out, verification is not an endorsement of content, as all sorts of grossly offensive material is “verified.” Twitter verifies celebrities to confirm their identities, which to some extent is the fulfillment of their legal responsibility.

-Ben

Ben Cohen:

“Twitter’s Faq: Why does Twitter verify accounts?
Verification is currently used to establish authenticity of identities of key individuals and brands on Twitter.”

As other’s have pointed out, verification is not an endorsement of content, as all sorts of grossly offensive material is “verified.” Twitter verifies celebrities to confirm their identities, which to some extent is the fulfillment of their legal responsibility.

-Ben

No no no, now you’re twisting things. Nowhere does it say it’s about legal responsibility or even to “confirm their identities” as a form of protection. You are hitting the realm of dishonesty here. They give the purpose right there in the FAQ as I posted earlier (and the answer to the very question after the one you quoted… How is that for being disingenuous?):

Twitter verifies accounts on an ongoing basis to make it easier for users to find who they’re looking for. We concentrate on highly sought users in music, acting, fashion, government, politics, religion, journalism, media, sports, business and other key interest areas. We are constantly updating our requirements for verification. Note, verification does not factor in follower count or Tweet count.

Hmmm

Twitter verifies accounts on an ongoing basis to make it easier for users to find who they’re looking for.

What was that?

to make it easier for users to find who they’re looking for.

Not as legal responsibility. If it was legal responsibility, they wouldn’t tell people not verified:

If you think you meet the criteria for verification and have not yet received a badge, please be patient. We are working within key interest areas to verify accounts that are sought after by other Twitter users. We don’t accept verification requests from the general public, but we encourage you to continue using Twitter in a meaningful way, and you may be verified in the future. Please note that follower count is not a factor in determining whether an account meets our criteria for verification.

See, it’s all for the benefit the users looking for person’s or brand’s account.
Be honest or go home.

It seems Bowie isn’t sufficient sealion repellent. Maybe drag queens would work better?

http://cimg.tvgcdn.net/i/2015/02/20/16a4bb11-21ce-4bf0-9413-9148818c9e86/drag-race-03-latrice-royale-like-that.gif

I’m trying to post the picture used on “The Man Who Sold The World”. Obviously as a man I’m inherently brilliant at tech stuff and I’m certainly not struggling to do so because I’m incompetent, but I just thought I’d give one of the women a chance.

Any takers?

@Alan

Right click the image and click “Open Imagine in a New Window” – if you’re using Chrome. Just make sure what you’re posting ends with a .jpg, .gif, whatever and just copy and paste the URL.

EDIT: Let me post this thing I made awhile back.

http://i.imgur.com/gQLvmil.jpg

That should be better.

@Alan
Do you mean this image?
http://www.rhino.com/sites/default/files/bowie.jpg