(04-27-2022, 05:54 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote:

(04-27-2022, 01:35 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: Nah, Twitter is now a significant part of the public square. The idea that you have to identify yourself in order to say unpopular things is begging them to persecute people who practice Wrongthink.

I disagree with your conclusions though your argument is not without merit.  Perhaps we can agree that those who want to authenticate themselves should be able to do so relatively easily.  For those that have not yet been authenticated, instead of a blue check mark, will have a pink vagina or steaming pile of [BLEEP] or some equally amusing yet appropriate logo next to their names.  And give users the ability to ignore all unauthenticated individuals with a switch in settings if they wish.

I'm on board with this idea.

But still think there's an even better way, that preserves the ability for some influential Twitter users to remain anonymous.

The government should make a law regulating any website where stuff can be shared virally, that before the ten thousandth person sees it, an employee of the website has to vouch that it is truthful, not deceptive, and not fraudulent.  If it doesn't pass that test, the social media company could still share it as long as it was clearly and prominently marked "Not true". A user could bypass the test by allowing the website to prominently mark his post as "just a joke".

---