Skip to main content


So, what episode are we at with the #Twitter Blue Checkmark saga? Here's the rough timeline as I understand it:

  • Before Elon Musk: Checkmark is attributed discretionarily, mainly to prevent impersonation.
  • After Elon Musk:
    1. Twitter Blue subscription is introduced that grants the checkmark.
    2. Impersonation immediately ensues. Twitter answers by preventing Checkmark accounts from changing their display name.
    3. Checkmark is divided in three colors: Gold for companies, Blue for individuals, Grey for government.
    4. Checkmark is derided for being bought out. As a response Twitter Blue subscribers ask for their checkmark to be hidden.
    5. Prominent accounts (like Beyoncรฉ) lose their checkmark.
    6. Prominent accounts that kept their checkmark (like Ron Perlman) defend themselves from claims they have subscribed to Twitter Blue.



Am I missing anything? Even twitterisgoinggreat.com can't keep up with the madness.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)

Kat Moss reshared this.

in reply to Hypolite Petovan

@Hypolite Petovan You're missing Elon constantly trying to give @wint a checkmark and so he's constantly changing his name

(Nitter addon enabled: Twitter links via https://nitter.net)

in reply to silverwizard

@silverwizard @wint Oh that's comedy gold.

(Nitter addon enabled: Twitter links via https://nitter.net)

in reply to Hypolite Petovan

Just learned Twitter is attributing the checkmark to deceased personalities account. The tooltip still says that they got the checkmark because they subscribed to Twitter Blue: twitter.com/Yeegrek/status/164โ€ฆ

(Nitter addon enabled: Twitter links via https://nitter.net)

in reply to Martijn Vos

@Martijn Vos Apparently it could be construed as "false endorsement" under the American Lanham Act but I'm no lawyer, and as usual, someone needs to actually sue.
in reply to Hypolite Petovan

Here's an idea! Let's ship it to production before anyone thinks about it.
โ‡ง