The check was intended to verify the identity of a specific type of person, which many people know, and therefore is at high risk of impersonation. That's it. Making the check $8 voids this purpose, and to add on top of this, the most vile group of people bought into this subscription, who are Elon's sycophants and go after him like dogs doing whatever he wants and repeating what he says.
Of course no one looking after their image would want this blue check anymore.
If Louis Vuitton started selling their fancy-ass bags for, say, $20, all the rich and famous people would not be caught dead holding their bags...
If you ignore what people are actually saying and assign them a motivation that supports a cynical narrative, you could summarize the situation that way. I'm not sure it's an intellectually honest take, but you can say whatever you think.
> "I am actively rooting for the downfall of twitter," @dril tells me. "I hope to sabotage their efforts to become profitable, no matter how futile, in the hopes that they will eventually close up shop and release us all from this toilet."
> "absolutely block on sight," @dril tweeted(opens in a new tab) back in November, when Musk's Twitter Blue first launched.
Did he know it would be used for garbage content back then? Or, does the first quote sound like he has some other agenda? I mean, I'm on his side regarding the downfall, but if I read your other comment about this subject, it sounds like these Anti-Paid-Blue people are there because they want to fight for the survival of high quality content on Twitter, which is a bit obsessive, from my point of view.
But blocking blue checks on sight does look like a low-effort way to keep trolls from invading one's feed.