Comments for Dear Wanna-bes, Your Twitter Stardom is Coming to an End

Dear Wanna-bes, Your Twitter Stardom is Coming to an End

2009-06-19T16:15:29Z

One of the most controversial practices widely used to build up influence on Twitter is now cause for account suspension, according to a message on the Twitter developers email list from a company support team member.

Using third party software to systematically add a large number of social connections each day, then break those connections with anyone who doesn't reciprocate, is a method used by some number of Twitter users to create an appearance of legitimacy for subsequent new connections. Twitter's Doug Williams said last night that such practices will now risk account suspension. Some users will be unhappy about the policy, many others will probably applaud it. There are valid arguments on both sides of the position.

]]> The issue was raised last night by developer Jesse Stay, one of the most consistently outspoken critics of Twitter policy and creator of the service SocialToo. Twitter's Doug Williams replied simply that "There is no limit to the number of unfollows. Using software to constantly churn followers in a repeated pattern of following and unfollowing will however risk suspension."

Critics have long complained that many people on Twitter have artificially inflated their social network despite producing no meaningful content on the site. The use of friend-inflation software has put unscrupulous marketers in particular in a position to broadcast their messages to a much wider network of people than they have "earned." It's been effective because a quick glance at the friend-to-followers ratio on someone's Twitter account profile page has been the easiest way to judge the legitimacy of a new social connection. Getting a new connection and evaluating whether it's worth reciprocating costs time and energy - so most users don't appreciate impersonal automated social connections.

Image: SocialMediaDouchebag.net

Combine the ego-boost of having a stranger "follow" you with the fact that lots of other people are already following them back, and new users are often happy to reciprocate a new connection. It must be a good party I've been invited to, you might say, look how many other people are already here. All too often users end up feeling fooled into attending the Web 2.0 equivalent of a multi-level marketing pitch session.

There's a widespread belief that "followers" on Twitter ought to be earned by a user's history of high-value contributions to conversation on the platform. The ability for users to discover other high-value people took a hit last month when Twitter made public replies from one user to another invisible for people not following the user being replied to.

Media hacker Dave Winer argued this morning that Twitter itself is the biggest offender. By sending hundreds of thousands of people to follow accounts on its Suggested User List, Winer contends that the company engages in the same kind of unfair artificial inflation of follower numbers for a select group of accounts that haven't necessarily earned that high profile with high quality content.

Users of automatic friend inflation software seem particularly offensive, though. They are often the most craven attention-seekers on the service, sometimes self-proclaimed "social media experts" who claim general legitimacy based on their large number of followers.

On The Other Hand

Not everyone will be happy with the Twitter policy of suspending accounts that have grown with the help of software. To draw a more favorable analogy, how different is this from automated promotional activities in other media?

No one is forcing people to follow-back accounts that friend them unexpectedly and have a lot of followers already. Shouldn't savvy users be responsible for evaluating an account's content quality themselves? When a social network has tens or hundreds of millions of users, is it not legitimate for businesses to use automatic methods to reach out to them?

A discussion of the policy would seem to be a good idea, instead of an arbitrary suspension of accounts based on Twitter HQ's apparent belief about how the service ought to be used. There is a small cottage industry formed already around "friend acquisition software" for Twitter. On one hand, it's an old-world business person's dream come true - just throw a little money at some software and gain thousands of friends! On the other hand, Twitter is an important new communication platform that represents the democratic and meritocratic hopes of many innovative people. It's also just a nice place to hang out and talk with friends, without someone trying to sell you things. Should we all be left to our own devices for building status, if that's important to us, on Twitter?

You might like following the ReadWriteWeb crew on Twitter. We think you're interesting and many of your friends already follow us! You can find ReadWriteWeb on Twitter, as well as the entire RWW Team: Marshall Kirkpatrick, Bernard Lunn, Alex Iskold, Sarah Perez, Frederic Lardinois, Sean Ammirati, Doug Coleman Dana Oshiro, Steven Walling, Jolie O'Dell and Lidija Davis.

Twitterrific icon used with permission from The Iconfactory.

Comment from Andy Roth on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T16:48:37Z

Never understood the thinking of following someone just because they follow you. I follow people with a high signal-to-noise ratio. Whether or not they are following me does not enter into the equation.

Comment from Sheamus on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T16:51:37Z

Good news. I get gamed all the time with this nonsense, usually by the same 30-50 accounts, and I've even taking to compiling a list of the worst-offending 'systems' on Twittercism.

Incidentally, while I realise Dave has been all over the SUL for a couple of months now, I was voicing essentially the same concerns about the benefits of being on the SUL back in March, and at various points thereafter. Just sayin'. ;)

Comment from Todd on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T16:53:45Z

"...Should we all be left to our own devices for building status, if that's important to us, on Twitter?"

Exactly, file in the same folder marked "power corrupts" with the killing off of allowing users to control their @ preferences.

I hate slimy auto-friending types just as much as anyone else, but this Draconian approach Twitter is taking is just as wrong as killing off user choice @'s was.

...Fonzie just put his other water ski on.

P.S. "eleventy-billion"?

Comment from Nathan Hangen on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:02:19Z

3 cheers for this policy. Most of the software is created by leech-like internet marketers looking to make a quick hit and run buck. Many of them don't even understand how to use Twitter. I applaud this move.

Comment from Todd on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:04:41Z

...oh yeah I forgot;

"There is no one right way to use Twitter." - Biz Stone

Apparently there is.

Comment from Madhav Tripathi on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:12:36Z

I am so much happy if stardom will come to an end because it should be, and these days twitter is suspending many accounts this is also very good, there should be a few rules for everyone.

Comment from Paul OFlaherty on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:15:34Z

While this policy has both it's good and bad points, Dave Winer is correct in his statement that twitter itself is the worst offender here and the suggested user list is not only inherently prone to (but may already be) being corrupted / abused.

If twitter is going to dictate how we accumulate followers, then they need to stop recommending followers without publishing clear guidelines as to how and why these people get on the list.

Also, they need to take an active interest in recommending "ordinary" twitter users.

Comment from Steff (Inari) on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:16:21Z

As one of the luddites who still insists on reviewing each new follower before deciding whether to follow them back, this won't really affect me. Some of the spammier users, however, are likely to be very annoyed.

Comment from Drew Shope on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:17:36Z

I started on Twitter by MASS following people. I got some followers, but I quickly realized I cared nothing for what they had to say. Twitter works so much better for connecting with people with similar interests.

Comment from Bill Hartzer on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:17:47Z

It's about time that Twitter got rid of the spammers. If you're not getting your followers legitimately then you don't need to be on Twitter.

Comment from Jody Reale on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:23:46Z

Doesn't this problem get solved when users decide to either protect updates or forgo the auto-follow? I say we wait for Guy Kawasaki to weigh in. (Holy Kaw!)

Comment from Steffan on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:40:51Z

@Marshall While I'm a huge proponent of growing your Twitter following organically, I completely agree with Dave Winer - Twitter is the biggest offender...and ReadWriteWeb is one of the biggest beneficiaries of Twitter's "suggested users" strategy - so I'm interested in hearing Richard's thoughts on this here in this post. Check out this screenshot of the "followers" list for @rww (ReadWriteWeb's Twitter account) that I took just now. What you'll see is a massive list of NEW Twitter users that have followed @rww during the account set up process...they havent even been using Twitter long enough to upload an avatar and they are following you... http://twitpic.com/7taov While I love ReadWriteWeb, you have to agree that the @rww follower numbers are severely inflated by Twitter's suggestion mechanism...of the most recent 100 users following @rww, only 34 of them have uploaded avatars. If these people are JUST getting into Twitter, I seriously doubt that they're even aware of what ReadWriteWeb is. More screenshots to come......

Comment from Jeremy Pair on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:42:29Z

When I get the email, "So and so is now following you," I look at their profile then recent tweets and if they are useful interesting, I follow back. If not, I block. Simple.

Comment from Erica on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:45:03Z

This policy would be fantastic! I'm so tired of getting spammy followers. A tweet for both personal and professional means, and my work twitter is for a web-centric business consulting firm (@businessways) and I hate the people that claim to have such a big following when all they've done is cheat. Most of their updates have zero substance anyway. I recently write a blog about this too... check it out!

http://confessionsofahopefulprofessional.blogspot.com/

Comment from Mike Langford on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:47:07Z

This is an excellent policy by Twitter. They aren't saying you can't use automated services to increase the number of people you follow. What they are saying is the churn some people are using to juice their numbers isn't helpful to the sustainability of the system as a whole.

I have had users follow me one day, unfollow the next, follow me again, then unfollow and on and on trying to prompt me to follow them back. As a general rule, I'll let anyone follow me as long as his profile looks somewhat like a real person but that pattern of activity leaves a bad taste in people's mouths.

It's important to keep in mind that Twitter is working hard to keep the service pure for it's early adopter population while making it more attractive for the mass market. Imagine how your Mom would react if she were subjected to the follower hoarded tactics such as this.

Great call Twitter!

@MikeLangford

Comment from Steffan on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T17:49:29Z

Screenshots comparing the growth of @rww @techcrunch and @timoreilly (see below)...what you'll see is the day that Tim was added to the suggested users list (his account was added as a suggested user after @rww and @techcrunch were). I personally think Tim is a human RSS feed and has been adding value to Twitter longer than almost anyone, and his growth rate, which was organic until recently, was equal to or greater than that of @rww before Twitter stepped in and added any of you. The data tells a clear story. I remember the day when @rww only had 5K followers ...that was only a few months ago. Now you're at almost 180K. How do YOU guys feel about this??

http://twitpic.com/7tf7t

Comment from rick on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T18:29:42Z

Isn't Winer talking about something different from what Twitter's talking about? As I understand it it's the CHURN that will risk banning, not merely adding tons of followers. The Suggested User List does promote a set of people who might not have earned that following, but it's a different beast than autofollowing and unfollowing if I don't follow you back.

Comment from Chris on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T18:30:09Z

I agree with Winer that Twitter is the biggest offender with the suggested user list. If you aren't careful when creating an account, you automatically follow some of these users. There should at least be a greater rotation of suggested users - we don't need to see how far @aplusk can go with his 2.3 million followers. We need more meritocracy for this list and it needs to be culled/updated frequently.

@clatko

Comment from Angela on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T19:24:29Z

Isn't that juvenile punk Ashton really responsible for inflated follower hype? Really, some of us don't care about celeb tweets! TwitSpam is a drag though.

Comment from Steffan on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T19:38:24Z

@Rick - I think it's obvious that @davewiner is talking about the same thing Twitter is talking about. In his post he says "Twitter wants to stop users from doing what they themselves do so much better. http://bit.ly/EMbpJ" .

To be clear, I'm NOT saying I don't think that @rww should be on the SUL (ReadWriteWeb is my favorite tech community on the web and you consistently add value to Twitter). I'm saying that @rww (like all users on the SUL) benefit from artifical follower inflation. This is the core of what Dave seems to have a problem with - it's artificial inflation of the numbers that, in some sense serve as "social proof" to the social web.

Comment from Steffan on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T19:41:21Z

@Rick I agree with the fact that the "Churn" has a negative impact on the social ecosystem. But that was never up for debate, was it?

Comment from Slade Roberson on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T20:06:29Z

I'm glad to hear this - excellent news!

I'm SO sick of the "I'm an internet marketer SEO make bajillions online" folks who are clearly not interested in following me for any authentic reason.

Comment from Barry Wheeler on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T20:11:53Z

Long overdue.

I applaud twitter for this.

Comment from Marshall on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T20:24:19Z

"There are valid arguments on both sides of the position."

No. There aren't. There are usability and anti-spam concerns on one side. There are rationalizations on the other.

Winer might think they're the same, but Twitter's suggested users function is genuinely aimed at engaging new users with some trusted content generators. That's usability (and retention)

On the other side, you have spammers who are quite good at suggesting themselves. From Twitter's perspective these folks are harming usability and retention.

These are entirely consistent positions.They could be mistaken, but they're consistent.

Comment from Dirk Lemmons on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T20:30:28Z

I think this is great news. I am very close to not using twitter because of all the automated twitter follows I get everyday. This is a good move by twitter and I say it needed to be done or twitter would soon fad away due to the overwhelming auto twitts.

Comment from Marshall Kirkpatrick on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T20:38:03Z

Dear Wanna-bes, Your Twitter Stardom is Coming to an End http://bit.ly/wSsiA (auto-friending clampdown) [from http://twitter.com/marshallk/statuses/2240386513]

Comment from David Dalka on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T20:49:55Z

Until I see enforcement of this, I will view it as a PR move.

Comment from Greg Bowen on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T20:56:28Z

Twitter - the ultimate 'it's all about me' resource. I thought web 2.0 is all about giving.

Certifiable douche bag at no cost! Awesome.

Comment from Mark Ginnebaugh on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T21:29:08Z

This is fantastic news. The reason Twitter is so valuable to me is because I choose who I follow carefully, and block useless followers religiously. Otherwise it's a big cyberspace garbage pile.

Comment from Jeff Crites on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T21:29:32Z

Absolutely applaud this. Crap services like Hummingbird create a spam kudzu in Twitter. And there's a big difference in being on a suggested user list, which is just that, suggestions that people can choose to follow or not ... and people using automated software that auto-follows/unfollows 24/7. That software has ruined Twitter for me. Good riddance. And I will smile thinking of the users of this crap, and the creators as well, screaming in panic.

Comment from scotchegg on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T21:50:14Z

Great move.

Now ban the Big followers who just spam everyone elses achievements and posts all day long and never reply to your replies to them.

Oh and auto ban if your tweet contains the word coffee.

Comment from Vince Stevenson on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T21:59:52Z

I am unhappy with these automated tools as they create a two tier system of those people who develop Twitter organicly and those who clearly do not. Rgds Vince

Comment from robot on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T23:29:50Z

Churning is when you add followers and then remove them immediately, just to get that notification email sent. There will always be a need to mass delete followers that 1 don't follow you back, and 2 are spamming you.

All you people that don't care about followers should turn off your notification so you are not notified... then it's like spammer don't exists. It is when you follow them back is when they become annoying.

Comment from Steffan on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T23:32:39Z

@Marshall - I agree. When it comes to the current practices of gaming twitter "There are usability and anti-spam concerns on one side. There are rationalizations on the other." Well said. Their decision is a good one and they seem to be implementing it in a way that will improve Twitter's overall experience for everyone. Kudos to them, it's about time. As I said earlier, there's no doubt that the "churn" is bad for the social ecosystem (creates spam etc). What muddies the issue is: A) that there are no official guidelines or policies that lead to a user's inclusion or exclusion on the SUL, B) that the SUL is not based on a crowdsourced, democatized model, making it less credible, and (most importantly) C) the obvious drastic effects the SUL has on the overall ecosystem, and the questionable motivations of Twitter (which is what the core issue is) I think Dave Winer correctly called a spade a spade and took issue with the fact the justification for the action was framed as "cracking down on artificial following inflation"...

Comment from @deepeddy on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T23:42:16Z

It's funny, but I have no problem with spammy followers. I only follow back people who I know or who look interesting when I read their feed. I have had few spammy followers ever. Am I just lucky?

Comment from Linnet Woods on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T23:46:44Z

It's good to know that Twitter have become aware of the damage done to a social networking community as a whole by the use of automation in that way.

Just in time, I think, as it has become ridiculous lately. I don't block people unless they are definitely spammers - I just don't follow back if I'm not interested but the tweeter is, or at least appears to be, a human. Even so, I have to block at least a third of the people who follow me every day and have noticed up to 15 accounts with identical tweets in them several times lately.

It has been sad to watch people I used to get along with on Twitter become infected with the human cattle-herding mentality (I ask if they shouldn't join Critter instead) and then stop tweeting with people in favour of tweeting at them. Having artificially increased their following by many thousands, they suddenly think they are popular and important and start playing the role of 'leader' to their followers!

Frankly, anything that reduces artificiality in social networking has to be a good thing!

Comment from Timothy Carter on 2009-06-19

2009-06-19T23:58:20Z

I find this is very interesting topic being a marketer and having been on Twitter for the last 19 months.

I know of more than a few people who utilize those software friending programs to really build large followings, but if you randomly scroll through their following list (and those software programs they used/use are why we have Twitter limits nowadays of 1000 new peeps) you see a large portion of the people that are following these self-titled "gurus" are spammy accounts, porn accounts, etc...in other words, NOT real people!

So I really can't put much value in their account...or their tweets.

I don't know if the numbers of who is following/being followed should really be of importance, because like the title of this post means...it's a matter of time...

...those peeps will fade away because their spammy actions won't be producing money.

The people who remain and have legitimate followings of active tweets/retweets are the ones who are giving value, who are connecting with people...online and off.

Timothy

Comment from Ziah on 2009-06-19

2009-06-20T05:31:20Z

Well maybe it's been said before here (too busy writing an auto-friend-ing Twitter app...j/k) But you if you use these types of applications to find the RIGHT kind of followers, then you won't have a problem with the spamming you get. I unfollow tons of people everyday, but I do this manually by watching the tweets. Some people are so dumb that half their links are busted, and I can't stand the people that are promoting the shady affiliate garbage like Google Adwords Link posting crap. I delete these people and block them forever. I do use Twollo, but I use it to find the right kind of people that are looking for the honest and trustworthy information they may be seeking. How else are you going to find these people if this type of software is banned? It's just like anything else on the market that allows automation. Some people will misuse the power and some people will use it the correct way. To ban all software from everyone is truly "draconian" as someone previously mentioned. I disagree with the banning of this type of software. I have forged great online relationships by finding people this way.

Comment from Ryan on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T08:27:24Z

I don't understand what all the fuss is about. You can unfollow spammers. You can block spammers. You can block affiliate marketers who market software to gain new followers. So what is the deal with people who gripe about spammers? You have the tools to rid these guys out of your timelines. If you manage your followers then you should be able to have a clean list of people you are following without people spamming you.
There is one thing that I have noticed about spammers. There are a lot of people who like them (except the spammers who DM everyone - people don't like those kind of spammers). Do a little experiment. If you notice someone you suspect as a spammer, do a search on the "shortened" link he is advertising. Chances are there is more than one account spamming the same link. Check how many followers are following each account. I know of 1 spammer with over 10 accounts with over 2000 followers in each account. That tells me that there are people who want this information.

Comment from Sebastyne on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T10:30:27Z

This is a good practice, I think. I use some automated systems myself, like auto-follow function, as it became too much work to check everyone's profile to decide whether or not to follow. So now I unfollow if the content a user submits is not to my liking. It's easier than following one by one. In other words, I'll give a follower a chance.

However, I know that autofollowing people will get me right on the spamming line. I do appreciate Twitter taking steps to stop the abuse of the system. Twitter is popular for a reason, and it can fail for a reason. Having your account spammed every 2 seconds will definitely lead to failure, as will checking accounts manually only to find 30 spammer accounts a day trying get you to follow.

Comment from Bulk Email Software on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T11:42:03Z

Twitter is like a breath of fresh air on the Social Media scene. I have been on it for just a few weeks now and I have met several interesting people. It is a platform to network with people you would like to meet in real life.

Comment from ocdgirl2000 on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T14:49:51Z

Thank goodness someone will be doing SOMETHING about this problem! I am sick and tired of these people spamming me and artificially "following" me. I don't need trillions of marketers following me, sending out their stupid announcements, sales pitches, garbage sales listings, and quotes for the day... This is not a competition or a popularity contest. We are not in elementary school, folks. This is about quality, not quantity, and about connecting with people on a REAL level, not bots automating our computer while we are out at some coffee bar drinking latte's.

Lets get real.While we are at it, we can start thinking about reviving the economy with some creative thinking.Like changing the way working hours should be for different job descriptions and services in this country.ie postal, banking,schools, etc..

Comment from SocialMarketingExpert -Wayne Clayton on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T14:57:34Z

Twitter...why not set up that when you follow someone, you cannot unfollow them for a week. Wouldn't that put a kink in the "effectiveness" of the Twitterspam?

Also while you're at it, NO ONE can have more than 200 followers with less than 20 posts. Tired of seeing people following 2000 and having 1500 followers with 2-3 (or worse NO) posts. Unless you're the Dalai Lama, no is is THAT interesting in 3 posts/updates.

Comment from Craig Allan Teich on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T15:57:17Z

But if they start suspending accounts that use auto-follow software, then all those geniuses who create and market the "eleventy billion followers in 12 seconds" software will go out of business, and then I'll no longer receive 75 DM's each day from Twitter "experts" with 62 followers who want to teach me how to grow my following on Twiiter.

Not only will this make me lonely, but who will I then turn to for Twitter wisdom?

BTW, what's the HTML tag for the Sarcasm font?

The above link is intended as a joke. :)

Comment from River on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T16:54:51Z

This issue is as clear as what's happening in the United States right now:

Twitters's new policy is like socialism -- we'll decide how you should manage this situation and force it on you whether you like it or not.

Jeremey Pair's response, "When I get the email, 'So and so is now following you,' I look at their profile then recent tweets and if they are useful interesting, I follow back. If not, I block. Simple.", is like capitalism.

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money." -- Margaret Thatcher.

Comment from Liz on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T17:40:13Z

"Friend acquisition software"? Talk about euphemisms! I like "follower churn" better! I think everyone has experienced Internet marketers doing this. There is one well-known Twitterer who followed & unfollowed me 4 times within one month until I got tired of it & blocked them.

A rule of thumb I use in deciding to follow someone is that they should have more messages than followers. It, of course, doesn't work with celebrities and some people but if someone has 10,000 followers & 100 messages, it is likely that they used automated software or has manually and aggressively followed/unfollowed people to build their follower numbers.

I supposed it is just a business tactic except that many people think someone's worth can be assessed by a person's follower number. My favorite example of this is @NicheTitans which has over 36K followers even though they've only posted 700 times & haven't been active for the past 2 months. Not that their Tweets weren't valuable but their follower number was clearly artificially boosted.

It only bothers me because if you take the time to evaluate new followers, it is irritating to have the same people follow, unfollow, rinse & repeat. Either follow or don't but enough of this auto-following game-playing.

Comment from Bill in Detroit on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T18:21:35Z

For all the kvetching, Twitter is a free service from which I gain value at no direct expense to myself. So long as it is not crippled beyond a useful level, I do not begrudge it's management the right to adjust their policies to suit the perceived needs of the service.

My son is here and so are a couple of my IRL friends. Moreover, this is a place where I can nurture some of my web-only relationships ... this week I was offered an opportunity to guest post on an "A-List" blog. I'm thinking the offer over -very- carefully, as I'm not certain that my own blogs are fit for that sort of traffic. In particular, the one linked to from my name (above) is more of an intimate discussion / thought-provoker than a '10m hits a day' money maker.

@BillinDetroit

Comment from Vanessa on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T19:25:38Z

I do not know there was software out there like this. I do not follow everyone, because some are not talking about anything that is worthwhile. For instance a young lady is following me, she as one update about a contest she won! Want does that have to do with me? I have never stated that I entered any contest ever so what was the point. Just simply watching a persons activity may give you insight to whether you want to follow them or not. And that is still questionable!

Comment from Imran Anwar on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T19:27:01Z

Very educational posting, but esp. loved the graphic and tweeted it. Keep up the good work and keep down those damn follwer #s harvesters.

Regards

Imran
Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/imrananwar/
Follow Me: http://www.twitter.com/imrananwar
FaceBook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=582866154
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/imran

Comment from jlbraaten on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T21:09:06Z

I wondered why I had a ton of new followers that unfollowed me after I would follow them back. In retrospect, these tweets were for things like "internet marketing." Makes sense.

Comment from Stephen C. Rose on 2009-06-20

2009-06-20T21:32:57Z

http://stephencrose.wordpress.com/2009/03/30/my-twitter-philosophy/

The use of software creates lists that are themselves inflated by duplicate accounts. Glad to see the policy change if this sticks.

Comment from Douglas on 2009-06-20

2009-06-21T03:04:08Z

I am so looking forward to this!

Comment from Robert on 2009-06-20

2009-06-21T05:17:55Z

We need a software solution. We need the equivalent of the email and forum spam blockers. Once a user name has been identified as being a spammer they can be placed on a blacklist for others to use as a way to block them.

Another thing I haven't seen addressed yet, is what about the load on the Twitter servers and the number of Fail Whales we experience. I don't want to connect with a bot. I don't want to experience outages because of bots.

Somebody develop the software that users can put in their own preferences for:

Follow to Followers Ratio.
Number of updates per day average.
Frequency of updates, average time between updates. (I'm un-following anyone that posts multiple tweets in a very short time to dominate my stream)
A keyword list to follow or not to follow.
Restrict to or from geographical areas.
Followers in common

Perhaps if twitter would offer these in a new tab in settings would allow the community as a whole and as individual users to define for themselves how they want to use the service.

I'm not a programmer so if one of you super nerds likes the idea and make a little out of it, I'd appreciate a little something for the idea. :)

Comment from D9r on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T14:45:13Z

Twitter should add an option that allows us to choose whether or not to accept followers using Auto-friending Software. This would be the ideal solution, assuming it isn't impossible to set up the programming.

This way everyone wins:

* those who don't mind being followed by auto-friending software can continue being followed as they are now

* those who do mind being spammed by auto-friending software can opt out (as is done with the 'do-not-call list for telephones)

@D9r
@PoliticMinds

Comment from DBL on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T15:19:05Z

'When I get the email, "So and so is now following you," I look at their profile then recent tweets and if they are useful interesting, I follow back. If not, I block. Simple.'

Why would you force people to stop following you just because *they* aren't interesting? A block seems like overkill here, like IP-blocking somebody from reading your website because they aren't cool enough.

Comment from Linda on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T16:16:38Z

While I don't like the concept of autofollow, Twitter's user interface makes it difficult for people to quickly & easily evaluate a follower before deciding if they would be a good match for your follow list. Twitter could make a simple update to their UI of the "your followers" page, and/or to the email alert that is sent out when a new follower is added. Twitter can use information they ALREADY DISPLAY in search results and email alerts. The time is takes to choose to follow someone back could be greatly reduced by using this same layout as Search. What I find most critical in making the choice to follow is their description and website link. I have been considering using Auto-follow because it takes long a long time to click through to each person's profile to read about them. Adding a DM button next to each user to say hello would be even better, and much more personal than setting up an auto-welcome from a 3rd party tool. Also, while I appreciate the email alerts now include # of followers, I wish Twitter would...

Comment from Robert Scoble on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T16:28:54Z

I use autofollow so people can DM me. I hate the whole system that Twitter has built and the Suggested User List is the worst thing Twitter has done.

Comment from Obayoo on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T16:32:15Z

That and restricting verified accounts to celebrities. Class separation on a social network.

Comment from Thom on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T16:55:33Z

Yeah, once again Twitter - along with SUL and now this - can't seem to help but do the next wrong thing every chance they get. Maybe Biz and Co could use an advisory committee that includes peeps other than VC hunger mavens.

I guess we get what we pay for. Still, though - uncool, imperious and wrong-headed.

Comment from guruvan (Rob Nelson) on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T20:36:07Z

I use the autofollow for the same reason as Robert. I don't care to miss messages from anyone. The DM system causes a great deal of problems. The SUL causes another set of problems. And, the apparent belief from the management that people should have huge followings and follow very small numbers lends itself to people desiring stardom. And finally, several of the rules that twitter has in place "to reduce spam" do nothing short of encourage it.

Comment from Kim Landwehr on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T20:52:53Z

I used autofollow for a short time, but stopped, I really don't have any need or desire to follow someone named hotsmokin mom (edited for spelling)

Comment from Rob on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T20:53:34Z

a welcome move from Twitter, IMO. But, too little too late.

and yes, it really is to a great extent twitter's own fault that people are so focused on follower numbers. Twitter has chosen to court, and support those capable of achieving stardom, and has chosen to focus more on its own stardom than it's technical well-being (architectural stability).

but where does this all get them? A 40% - 60% 30day attrition rate, that's where. In truth, I don't see the real number of Twitter regulars increasing very much over time. I see the same faces, day in and day out.

People are likely to tire of Twitter, and the gaming that goes on there. This move will not stop the gaming, it will only make the spammers try harder.

So, I choose to spend the majority of my time and effort on FriendFeed, and Facebook. (where did I see the link to this article? Not on Twitter!)

Comment from guruvan (Rob Nelson) on 2009-06-21

2009-06-21T20:55:55Z

I stopped caring about the quality of people I follow as I found more ability in my client tools to simply group the ones I want to read. Now that I have the ability to look at one column of "ungrouped following" I can scour the new people for people to put into groups, and people I should just go ahead and block. The rest? I just leave them there. You never know when you'll see something interesting from someone unexpected.

Comment from Robin on 2009-06-22

2009-06-22T07:13:30Z

What is the problem here? Spammers using up bandwidth - is that reason for this spam-o-phobic garbage?

My 11 year old was the one who pointed out to me that twitter, facebook, etc. didn't like paying out for extra bandwidth because of spammers. A very valid point. If that's the reason - I say go ahead crash their party or make them pay to do it.

If that's not the reason - we can always block people who piss us off - so what's the big deal?

Comment from Scott Allen on 2009-06-22

2009-06-22T10:34:09Z

This is another case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Just like with auto-DM's, it's not the practice itself that is really so problematic as the fact that a significant portion -- perhaps even the majority -- of people who use it then turn out to be spammers or at least overly self-promotional.

I was at 4,300 followers (at about a 1:4 ratio) organically before I started this practice myself. I certainly don't need a high Twitter follower count to lend myself credibility as a social media expert.

And I really resisted it at first. But then I took a look at Twitter's own practices, plus the huge number of 3rd-party services (Twitterholic, etc.) that promote people with high follower counts. I also considered what was needed to use Twitter as a B2C marketing channel. I also realized that I was talking in a fishbowl to the same few hundred social media wonks all the time. :-)

So in order to diversify my network and extend my outreach, yeah, I started using automated tools to add new followers.

The results? Outstanding as far as I'm concerned. I've met some great new people, added an incredible variety of viewpoints and opinions to my conversation area, gotten several business opportunities as a result of some of the new people I've met, etc.

Bottom line: Content is king.

If someone's content is crap, unfollow them (or don't follow them in the 1st place). If their content is good, if they engage you in conversation, who CARES what their follower count or follower ratio is??? It's a non-issue.

And frankly, if you're not auto-following them, why does it matter if they follow you? And if you're auto-following people back, uh... well, you're kind of asking for it.

If you're interested in more insight or discussion about how and why this practice can be beneficial, I wrote about it on my blog when I started the practice back at the end of March:

http://sn.im/morefollowers

Twitter should just let the free market decide. If people are that bothered by this practice, they simply won't follow people who engage in it. The people (or bots, as the case may be) who do follow these people... let them be. They're not hurting anyone else.

Comment from Duh on 2009-06-23

2009-06-23T15:27:26Z

Honestly, who cares about banning people using software? Yeah, they artificially inflate their accounts. But guess what?

You NEVER have to follow them. You can even BLOCK them. Twitter is, and always has been, an opt in network.

Twitter should be shifting their attention toward fixing the "toilet" of a feature known as Trending Topics. It has the potential to be great, but it has NO spam controls right now and is filled with idiots just repeating the names of all of the trending topics, links to malware and identical messages reposted by the same user every 30 seconds. Wouldn't it make sense to fix THAT?

Comment from ChristyB on 2009-06-24

2009-06-25T06:13:02Z

I'm fairly new to Twitter and until I read this didn't even know I was supposed to follow those who follow me. I did notice some new peeps following me they were here today and gone tomorrow but I never even looked at them or missed them when they left. I do actively "look" for interesting tweeters to follow who have similiar interests or are funny. I thought that was the idea.

Comment from Jordan on 2009-06-25

2009-06-25T08:08:03Z

Without auto following only celebrities would reach the top of twitter, and they post the most useless content. auto following is like a billboard, it lets people know you exist and its up to the consumer to take action.

Comment from Andrew on 2009-07-03

2009-07-03T13:36:25Z

I must be the only one who sees this the other way round. I thought Facebook was for the 'look at me types' the 'me me me' the narcissist type. After all, thats the platform where you can put up photos and do 'How beautiful am I' quizzes. I thought Facebook was for your online non professional resume so to speak. For others to stumble upon and check you out.

To me Twitter can easily be set up for a close knit circle of your personal friends. This is your real 'flesh and blood' friends 'your gang' or 'posse'. The people you seriously want in this group. Do you really want your mother, boss, dealer, ex boy/girl friend in the same room. Every person you've ever met? That's Facebook.

On Twitter simply make your profile or account private (your friends too) and you have a tight little community, or 'circle of friends' for you Facebookers. Think of it like an email address book. Only people you really know are in it. If your private on Twitter, not just any old drunk can follow you unless you let them. If you want to allow a stranger access because they appear interesting, do by all means. If they play up simply block them. But during their time with you they would have seen no photos, wouldn't have seen those groups you were in, you know, the ones with those controversial titles referring to race, alcohol and How I met your Mother.

I think people make fun of Twitter because of the way people use it. Twitter is not about 'Me'. It's about me helping you. Not by tweeting you every five minutes about inane thoughts about nothing. I can't believe we once complained about getting bank or viagra spam in our inboxes, but today we willingly or most of us it seems are quite happy to annoy their friends with updates every 10 minutes. About nothing really important.
This goes for Facebook and Twitter.

10:05 Timmy is making a sandwich.

10:17 mmmmm ham.

10:32 why is it there is never a band aid around when you want one.

10:40 DAMN YOU WILTSHIRE!!!!

10:45 Timmy just had the yummiest ham and tomato sandwich but tomato juice can sting.

8:27 Prison Break in 3 minutes you beauty.

11:13 night all.

That's not what Twitter or Facebook status updates are about. It's about me getting a useful piece of information out their that will benefit one or all my friends or complete strangers if i choose. And not about me getting a gold star for doing it.

10:05 Timmy just had a baby girl. 2 pounder. Yay.

10:45 Geeze bbq chickens only 2 bucks at Joes Corner Shop. Get on it.

If you are in a close knit group of friends or family only they will see. If for some resaon you don't want Uncle Larry to know, direct tweet and leave Uncle Larry out of it (though I think he'll find out eventually). But Google will never know, well it will too eventually, but not instantly right now. As a Facebook status update this goes to all your friends though you can segregate people into groups. The chicken one may be a bit spammy. But Timmy is your friend and he knows you like chicken. Grandma doesn't and it gives Brian nightmares but they'll just ignore the tweet. Information that people can actually use or choose to ignore is the trick. Nobody cares if you're making a sandwich, but if the ham was going for 50c a kilo your mates might find that useful, or not. That stranger who sees it (who lives on the other side of the world) well he can't do much harm with that info. Remember at the end of the day, we choose what we say.

9:32 Damn just got off the plane in Hawaii and just remembered I left the front door wide open. Doh lol

No thats not what you say on Facebook or Twitter unless you really trust everyone in your 'hood'.

You can be tight on Facebook too, but it's a popularity contest between your friends let's get real. That's fine, just make your account private though. You'll still be able to see all you friends stuff, and how many friends they have and if they are green or not. Or if they're a lesbian vampire from outer space. But outsiders won't.

People use both platforms in different ways. Personally I think everyone on Twittter should be under anonymous names. Your super hero name, your secret identity. Then we could let rip and poor our thoughts out their without fear of pissing someone off or losing a job. It's about the greater good not about how much credit or how many are going to notice you when you tweet or update your status. It's about dropping knowledge into the pool for someone who may might need it.

This is where artificial inteligence will stem from. A computer may become as fast as a brain in 20 years. But it won't have emotion or compassion or any of the magic that make us human. But being able to walk up to a computer and ask it a question and have it come back with a straight answer, that day will come. But it won't be you talking to a computer it will just be someone out there had the answer and it was in the pool.

If you don't need to know nufin, keep walking and catch that plane to Hawaii.

Comment from Patty on 2009-07-06

2009-07-07T02:27:34Z

I tried an autofollow software in the beginning, but found it was letting more spammers/porn streams follow me and my stream was getting full of those type of feeds that I wasn't interested in...so I had to disable it. Some people might find value out of it to save them time, but I think it is best to follow those who interest you or at least interact with you and @ or dm you or RT what you have to share.

Comment from PJ Edwards on 2009-08-23

2009-08-24T06:11:44Z

Good riddance! Man, ever since I signed up I have been in perpetual war with these "gamers." Silly me for actually having a personality and hoping that folks would respond to something I write. But no! Instead someone just installs a script, follows a bunch of unwitting souls and gets a bajillion follwers and thus more street cred, then someone like me. Well THANK YOU Twitter for answering my calls to eliminate this crappy way of abusing the system in order to be the 'Biggezt Ztar on the Twittering Interwebz!' Good riddance to fake people.

Comment from jharlaar on 2009-09-16

2009-09-17T01:44:37Z

Great article. Although there are a lot of followers on Twitter using it for fun,interaction etc...not a lot are using it to promote real business value.

Comment from jharlaar on 2009-09-16

2009-09-17T01:46:21Z

Great article - changes to Twitter