I remembered liking Red Green on PBS long ago. Not long ago I tried rewatching some of it and it was so very bad. You can watch the full series here.
Huh, it just occurred to me that Elmo has missed a perfectly good opportunity to blame the cause of the bridge collapse on a Jewish conspiracy ala MTG. Has he recently changed his ketamine dosage?
Yes, unfortunately sarcasm is not always obvious on the Webz.
Can’t tell if this is sarcastic or not. 
Lol, a bunch of people just received blue checks… and don’t want them.
Looks like Premium is now Freemium if you’re influential enough.
Guess it’s not just Stephen King getting the unwanted free blue checkmarks.
Allow me to step in here in my capacity as official pedant. “As an influential member of the community on X, we’ve given you a complimentary subscription to X Premium …” This is not comprehensible English, and was apparently written by one of Elmo’s not-yet-fired marginally illiterate sycophants.
“We” here clearly refers to the preceding referent “influential member of the community”. According to standard English, that’s just how standard English grammar works: whoever is getting the free blue checkmark is apparently giving it to himself, while also referring to himself in the majestic plural as the royal “we”. Although they’ve fucked that up, too – it should be “… we’ve given ourselves a complimentary royal subscription …”
I suspect the goal is to make it difficult to tell the difference between paid Twitter users and influential ones. They know that, right now, that blue check with a lot of subscribers mostly means “right-wing grifter.”
Unfortunately, the tool I have long used to tell the difference does not seem to be actively updated anymore. Though, to be fair, I’d stopped really needing it.
Only very recently did I actually use Twitter beyond reading one feed for a webcomic artist I like. And even then the verified status didn’t really matter, as I was mostly debunking TERFs that showed up in my “For You” feed. It was oddly “fun”, for certain values of that word.
It’s a classic example of the grammatical error known as a dangling modifier. While the intended meaning is often clear, it is a sign of sloppy, careless writing and obviously prone to causing confusion.
This is not one of those “rules” of questionable validity, like splitting infinitives or ending a sentence with a preposition. It’s just wrong.
I like the cut of your jib, Mystal.
Haven’t logged on in a while. There really are a lot of porn teasers in my main feed now. Is that what it looks like for everybody? Or just because I’m not following very many users.
The media has been complaining about twitter’s porn-bots, but frankly I find them relatively benign, even wholesome compared with the pig-butchering scam-bots. Twitter has always tolerated porn accounts that behave themselves, but yes I’ve seen an uptick of likes and follows from accounts with links to Only-fans knockoffs or maybe malware websites - I haven’t clicked to find out. I should also report that I’ve seen way fewer Russian troll bot accounts than I did in 2016 or 2020.
Let’s gather some data. On March 4th I blocked about 50 bots. How many followers have I acquired since and what are they like?
1 scam follower that posted about 6 pics
“Su that” public profile: “Nice to meet you. My hobbies are reading, food and sports. I like cats:kissing_heart: I like to meet new friends while traveling:tada:
” She joined in Fall 2023, posted about 6 pics of food, followed me over a month ago. I followed back out of curiosity. She sent me a banal DM this week. I block the scammer. The point is they play a longer game.
Scam bots. No posts. I’m guessing they are not porn bots because they include no link. 23 of those in the past month.
Scam bots. 1 post with banal message, maybe 2 pics. 7 of those in the past month.
4 pornbots with links.
1 dubious Japanese follower who has protected their posts. Might be legit, since the pic doesn’t contain a human figure.
2-4 real follows.
So the score is 31 scam bots, 4 porn bots, one uncertain, 2-4 real follows. Nice site you have there Elmo. I find the scam bots more prevalent and more disturbing, but that’s me. Typical scam example: @FaesIsla None are premium X accounts.
I get fewer crypto fake interactions, because I report those.
To be fair, I see a shit ton on Facebook and Instagram as well. Much more than I ever did before.
If I used those platforms a lot, I’d probably be annoyed, but I’m not on them often. If anything they remind me that I’m not missing out on much.
And yeah, they seem relatively benign (though like you I don’t follow links, maybe those links take you to a malware or phishing site, but you have to know you’re taking a risk clicking on them). This isn’t a “trick grandma into thinking the bank needs her info” sort of scheme.
Jesus, now I’m happier than ever that I’ve never had a Twitter account.
You know, there’s a perineum joke in there… somewhere…
X perineum just somehow seems more apt.
It does certainly have a taint…
Q. Why is there no full frontal nudity on X?
A. Because nudes are always in profile.
Some More News (which is hilarious by the way) has presented the argument that Musk is an Nazi sympathizer.
In other news, the Pope is in fact Catholic despite all appearances to the contrary.
Seems exceedingly obvious to me. And has for years.