> Imo the correct move would have been to open up verification for everyone.

Well, the correct move would be to actual verify people. Just taking their money means nothing.

Sure, that is what I meant. Otherwise it's not verification anymore (and the new Twitter Blue isn't).

Truth, this was a pre-Elon Twitter thing, they should have opened up verfication for everyone. I had no idea if I was debating a bot, a paid anonymous account or a genuine real person. If I was in a park talking to a random person, I could see that they are real. On Twitter, I can't do that. So I end up not even putting the time in, because I don't know if they are real.

Verification for everyone makes no sense to me. I don't care if @JohnSmith is the John Smith from Seattle, or the John Smith from Miami, or the John Smith from anywhere else, especially since there are likely more than one John Smith in each of those cities. The only reason to care is if the figure is in some way notable, which was the point.

It turns out to be important to know which is the official Eli Lilly account, and at some point it was deemed important to know who was a news reporter, rather than someone attempt to trade on the reputation of a newspaper to support their own opinions.

Verifying everyone is definitely missing the point of verification.