When twitter started taking the blue checkmark away from people as "punishment" I saw that as nonsensical. The blue check was to confirm the account was real, and not an imposture. It wasn't supposed to be a signal of "quality." The first person I remember they took the checkmark from was Milo Yiannopoulos. I still don't understand the reasoning for this.
The blue check wasn’t really about identity. It functions as a “noteworthy” marker. Blue checks get notifications from other blue checks is a separate section.
So Milo was hassling one of the actresses from ghostbusters. Her important notifications were full of insults. She complained to her talent agency.
Her talent agency reps a lot of celebrities. Their complaint was that they need blue check notifications to be civil because the talent has to look for questions from reporters and other celebrities.
Pulling Milos blue check was the easiest way for Twitter to fix the problem.
> Their complaint was that they need blue check notifications to be civil because the talent has to look for questions from reporters and other celebrities.
Well, then, here's the first half-truth. Milo may have roasted a celebrity who just made a bomb of a movie, but the complaints were largely about people responding to Milo who would also "@" the celebrity. So there really wasn't an issue that it was hard for this actor's staff to sort out questions from reporters, etc. She could have also simply blocked Milo. Problem gone!
https://www.fastcompany.com/40511058/most-twitter-execs-didn...