I AM KIRRRRRROOOOOOKKKKKK!!!!
Word to your mother.
<div></div><bel><biv><devoe>[<a href="//storify.com/cbccommunity/william-shatner-is-sick-of-nobodies-b eing-verified" target="_blank">View the story "William Shatner is sick of 'nobodies' being verified on Twitter" on Storify</a>]<h1>William Shatner is sick of 'nobodies' being verified on Twitter</h1><h2></h2><p>Storified by <a href="https://storify.com/cbccommunity">CBC News Community</a>· Mon, Jun 23 2014 21:56:42 </p><div>Cbc</div><div>His dedication to Twitter <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/yourcommunity/2014/03/william-shatn er-quit s-twitter-returns-hours-later.html" class="">may be questionable</a>, but Canadian actor William Shatner has certainly got got some strong opinions when it comes to the social network -- specifically, which users should (and should <i>not</i>) have blue check marks beside their usernames.<div><br></div><div>Those who use the social network regularly know that becoming "verified" on Twitter is a special privilege.</div><div><br></div><div>Often reserved for celebrities, journalists, and notable media personalities, the blue check mark of verification is sought after by many users as a mark of authenticity (or, in some cases, popularity.)</div><div><br></div><div>On Saturday, Engadget journalist (and verified Twitter user) John Colucci celebrated the fact that his publication had reached one million followers on Twitter with a tweet.</div></div><div>OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG #Engadget1M http://t.co/YM8IpSfpi2John Colucci</div><div>Another user congratulated Colucci, who runs Engadget's social media accounts, on the achievement by likening it to a time when Shatner had followed a brand he works for on Twitter. </div><div>@johncolucci I had the same moment yesterday when @WilliamShatner RT'd me ... well more like me as @MandalayBay... http://t.co/9SIvrCTTT9Lewis</div><div>Colucci playfully wrote back "Next goal: beat Shatner in follower count :)"<div><br></div><div>Noticing the mention in his timeline, Shatner turned his attention on Colucci.<div><br></div><div>"Why are you even @verified?" he wrote. "If this guy can get verified, I'll nominate my social media guy."</div></div></div><div>@johncolucci Why are you even @verified? If this guy can get verified I'll nominate my Social Media guy.William Shatner</div><div>Many of those who saw the tweet in their timelines bristled, tweeting back to Shatner in defense of Colucci and other un-famous verified Twitter users.</div><div>@WilliamShatner @johncolucci Heads up, Shatner, the force is no longer with you. This is the internet, where geeks rule, not bad singers.@evleaks</div><div>@WilliamShatner @HolidayJesus @evleaks Wow. Used to think Shatner was cool but now he's just a douchebag. #youhadyourtimeoldmanLDR</div><div>@WilliamShatner @johncolucci @verified He's verified because he's excellent at his job. I'd advise your social guy do the same.Michael Gorman</div><div>@johncolucci whoa just saw William Shatner now has a beef with your verified status. WTH pettyCynthia Drescher</div><div>Hey Twitter, can I be @verified just to piss off William Shatner even more?Chelz Wiz</div><div>Undeterred by the negative feedback, Shatner continued to engage in the conversation. Here are a small selection of his tweets from last night:</div><div>@evleaks So why aren't you @verified if geeks rule? Or are you one of those elitist types where a recognition as a verified account is neg?William Shatner</div><div>.@WilliamShatner Are you kidding me? @TMZ loves stuff like this. "Celebs -- or their idiot social media reps -- Being Jerks on Twitter".@evleaks</div><div>@evleaks @TMZ So you want me to call Mr. Levin and tell them Engadgets Social Media Mgr is on a power trip on Twitter? Don't think he cares.William Shatner</div><div>@evleaks I don't know what you do (besides butt kissing) but at 177k followers you must be doing something right.William Shatner</div><div>@WilliamShatner @MyBuddyValium @evleaks Sucks up? I think you mean "defends respectfully".Windows RT Source</div><div>@WinRTSource @MyBuddyValium @evleaks Sounded like big ole ass kissing to me but #Twittersound hasn't been invented yet.William Shatner</div><div>He also called out Engadget and some of its journalists directly.</div><div>I want to know how Engadget has all these seemingly unimportant jobs with all @verified accounts. @Support it's a mockery. Want names? ContdWilliam Shatner</div><div>.names that are @verified: an_dbowen: editorial asst , jobfingus: assoc ed, davidpkfishman: ex-Engadget full time student & a host of othersWilliam Shatner</div><div>@DashaPohoral @Numeson @verified @twitter and nobodies should not be verified because it shows a huge flaw in the Twitter system.William Shatner</div><div>Later, he publicly asked why specific actors were not verified on Twitter while people with jobs titles like "Editorial Assistant" had blue checks.</div><div>Why is @GineokwKoenig, @RobertPicardo and so many other PUBLIC figures not @verified but a college student & editorial asst are? It's wrongWilliam Shatner</div><div>Then he straight up abandoned his quest for a more elite verification system by asking Twitter if he could be un-verified altogether.</div><div>Maybe I need to request to be unverified? Who wants to be part of a broken system that folks can pay $ or reward cronies while others wait?William Shatner</div><div>@verified @support unverify my account pleaseWilliam Shatner</div><div>I need to run. I'll be thinking sweet unverified dreams...William Shatner</div><div>Today, in response to even more users who were prodding him about this views on verified accounts, Shatner <a href="https://twitter.com/WilliamShatner/status/481128592764452864" class="">continued ranting</a> about the issue. <div><br></div><div>News of the entire episode prompted <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/william-shatner-went-on-a-mas sive-ra nt-about-how-hes-sick-of" class="">some sites</a> and Twitter users to post gifs like these:</div></div><div>Buzzfed</div><div>Anyway, in light of The Shatner Situation™, here's this: http://t.co/lnmvS13IElBen Gilbert</div><div>Buzzfed</div><div><b>What are your thoughts on verified Twitter users? Do you agree with Shatner that blue check marks are handed out too easily? Weigh in below.</b></div>
GrailOfThunder: Meh.. Shatner's always been an ass. His ST:TOS costars have said so, Roddenberry has said so, and he's proven it himself numerous times.
Mugato: I would say that he's finally gone senile but he's never played with a full deck.He was great in this,
Because People in power are Stupid: [37.media.tumblr.com image 350x243][37.media.tumblr.com image 350x243][37.media.tumblr.com image 350x243][31.media.tumblr.com image 350x243][38.media.tumblr.com image 350x243][37.media.tumblr.com image 350x243][shame-full.com image 350x243][shame-full.com image 350x243]
StopLurkListen: That... site. Unreadable ... formatting...
cetacei: Something tells me this is not actually Shatner doing these tweets. They're not funny enough, and why would he spend time even doing this?
Mugato: How does anyone know that these celebrities are actually writing these tweets? Twitter has to be the dumbest farking tech fad ever. Except it's not a fad, it doesn't seem to be going away.If it is really Shatner obsessing over Twitter people, it makes his little "Get a Life" speech sadly ironic.
skinbubble: [s1.yimg.com image 720x486]Get a life!
RottenEggs: skinbubble: [s1.yimg.com image 720x486]Get a life!Sorry dude but me and my girlfriend at the time came up with that phrase a few months before Shatner . it was a play on the phrase " Get a job " which was popular at the time . But he gets all the credit : (
fatassbastard: [i.imgur.com image 400x300]I mean, I like Bill and stuff, but man...
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Apr 30 2017 13:05:12
Runtime: 0.211 sec (210 ms)