The ongoing X and Elon Musk Transgressions Thread

[PsYcNeT]

Musk said comedy was allowed back on Twitter but still has yet to post anything funny

[devo22]

bet he's just loving all the attention he's getting right now.

[PeteMoss]

I'm willing to see what he does. Its not like Twitter was on any path to success without him.

I suspect he'll just lose interest in it as whatever he does makes limited difference. The 'pay money' for verification thing will probably make some money although - I doubt it's much as most people will just not to do it.

[dino7c]

Elon is going full Trump...odd choice considering the far right thinks real men dont drive electric cars
Glad I sold TSLA a while back

[Fuzz]

With Elon Musk in charge, Twitter is planning to boost the price of its Blue subscription plan from $5 to $20 per month and make it mandatory for verified users, according to Platformer's Casey Newton and The Verge. If it launches the plan, verified users (celebrities, politicians, journalists, etc.) will have to sign up to the service within 90 days or they'll lose the blue check mark. And employees working on the project have reportedly been told they'll be fired unless they implement the changes by November 7th.

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-c...051906957.html

He can have my checkmark when he pry's it from my cold crispy pickle.

You know he doesn't have confidence in his employees when he has to threaten them with firing for something as simple as a price increase. "I'd like you to implement this feature, or you're fired." I'm sure moral is high.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

What will happen if most people don't do this is it'll just result in a ton of impersonation accounts. This will definitely happen for people like athletes who for the most part don't care if they have a blue checkmark or not.

[comrade]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-c...051906957.html

He can have my checkmark when he pry's it from my cold crispy pickle.

You know he doesn't have confidence in his employees when he has to threaten them with firing for something as simple as a price increase. "I'd like you to implement this feature, or you're fired." I'm sure moral is high.

The part about the firing is pretty wild. Does he expect his decisions to get slow-rolled? He has tweeted that Twitter has 10 managers for every coder, I wonder if it's more about separating out who is actually needed to make changes to the site in preparation for larger layoffs. Or maybe he's just looking for anybody who resists, so he can fire them. Looking to assert his control even if it means losing a bunch of employees.

Very heavy-handed for sure, but it'll be interesting to watch it unfold.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by comrade

The part about the firing is pretty wild. Does he expect his decisions to get slow-rolled? He has tweeted that Twitter has 10 managers for every coder, I wonder if it's more about separating out who is actually needed to make changes to the site in preparation for larger layoffs. Or maybe he's just looking for anybody who resists, so he can fire them. Looking to assert his control even if it means losing a bunch of employees.

Very heavy-handed for sure, but it'll be interesting to watch it unfold.

Probably trying to get people to quit so he doesn't have to pay severance.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

What will happen if most people don't do this is it'll just result in a ton of impersonation accounts. This will definitely happen for people like athletes who for the most part don't care if they have a blue checkmark or not.

Celebrity vanity is far too high to allow them not to pay for a blue check mark.

[ah123]

Really interesting article on the financial pickle Musk has gotten into

Last year, Twitter’s interest expense was about $50 million. With the new debt taken on in the deal, that will now balloon to about $1 billion a year. Yet the company’s operations last year generated about $630 million in cash flow to meet its financial obligations.

That means that Twitter is generating less money per year than what it owes its lenders. The company also does not appear to have a lot of extra cash on hand. While it had about $6 billion in cash before Mr. Musk’s buyout, a large portion of that probably went into the cost of closing the acquisition.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/30/t...tter-debt.html

No wonder he wants to layoff everyone and wants a subscription service. He’ll probably start charging per tweet next

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Celebrity vanity is far too high to allow them not to pay for a blue check mark.

Not everyone that is verified is a wealthy celebrity.

[Azure]

If he wants to charge for the verification, which I don't see as a bad thing, he has to offer those that are verified something back where they benefit.

As an example, Darren Hayes, who many here would regard as one of the better Flames reporters, is verified. Does he benefit enough from being on Twitter where many Flames fans follow him that he would pay for the blue check? Maybe, maybe not. Not sure about everyone else, but 100% of the Darren Hayes content I read comes from reading a tweet first, clicking the link and reading the article.

In fact I hardly visit most major sports sites, and even watch most highlights on Twitter as well. I always felt that the sports side of things was the best part of Twitter, and had the best user experience.

Darren Hayes might not be a celebrity, but he has 13.5k followers, so I could see someone like him pay to keep the blue check, and perhaps other premium features.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by ah123

He’ll probably start charging per tweet next

Crap, guess I'm paying $0 per year on Twitter.

[photon]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Probably trying to get people to quit so he doesn't have to pay severance.

This. Toxic work environments are great for clearing out people without having to pay for it.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by photon

This. Toxic work environments are great for clearing out people without having to pay for it.

Well....not necessarily. Making life Hell in hopes that people will quit is Constructive Dismissal.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Azure

If he wants to charge for the verification, which I don't see as a bad thing, he has to offer those that are verified something back where they benefit.

As an example, Darren Hayes, who many here would regard as one of the better Flames reporters, is verified. Does he benefit enough from being on Twitter where many Flames fans follow him that he would pay for the blue check? Maybe, maybe not. Not sure about everyone else, but 100% of the Darren Hayes content I read comes from reading a tweet first, clicking the link and reading the article.

In fact I hardly visit most major sports sites, and even watch most highlights on Twitter as well. I always felt that the sports side of things was the best part of Twitter, and had the best user experience.

Darren Hayes might not be a celebrity, but he has 13.5k followers, so I could see someone like him pay to keep the blue check, and perhaps other premium features.

There would have to be an additional benefit to him though. What is he getting out of having the checkmark. You are still going to follow him and click his articles whether or not he has a checkmark or not.

The only time the check mark particularly matters is when people are faking another's account. In sports this is typically where some guy with a slightly mis-spelled insider name is reporting fake trades.

The benefit is having the right guy verified is to the readers though. What does it matter to real Elliott Friedman if fake Elliott Friedman is making up fake trades. The benefit is to the users of the service who can quickly figure out its a fake account.

[PeteMoss]

The paying for checkmarks thing only works for businesses and if you give them the ability to mass DM or something that is annoying for users. Or you come up with some other service for those with the checkmarks.

The people who people want to follow with the checks are the reason twitter exists for the most part. If its just a bunch of randos - its basically CalgaryPuck without moderation (essentially a game thread). Charging the people who are bringing people to the platform is a weird business model.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

There would have to be an additional benefit to him though. What is he getting out of having the checkmark. You are still going to follow him and click his articles whether or not he has a checkmark or not.

The only time the check mark particularly matters is when people are faking another's account. In sports this is typically where some guy with a slightly mis-spelled insider name is reporting fake trades.

The benefit is having the right guy verified is to the readers though. What does it matter to real Elliott Friedman if fake Elliott Friedman is making up fake trades. The benefit is to the users of the service who can quickly figure out its a fake account.

You answered your own question. Their verified reputation is worth far greater than the monthly fee.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

The paying for checkmarks thing only works for businesses and if you give them the ability to mass DM or something that is annoying for users. Or you come up with some other service for those with the checkmarks.

The people who people want to follow with the checks are the reason twitter exists for the most part. If its just a bunch of randos - its basically CalgaryPuck without moderation (essentially a game thread). Charging the people who are bringing people to the platform is a weird business model.

Well that and if you can just pay to have a checkmark, it's worthless. Who cares if someone is just willing to spend $20/month for a checkmark?

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Yoho

You answered your own question. Their verified reputation is worth far greater than the monthly fee.

I asked the question - why does 'real' Elliotte Friedman care if mis-spelled fake Elliot Friedman is reporting that the Flames traded a 1st round pick for Brock Boeser today. Its not him making a reporting error. Its not going to harm his reputation.

Its twitter trying to make the real guy pay money because they allow the fake guy on their service.