Comments on: Conversations don’t scale http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/ Putting you in touch with your crowds Tue, 31 Jan 2012 10:52:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Quora http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/#comment-4463 Quora Fri, 14 Jan 2011 16:40:42 +0000 http://www.wewillraakyou.com/?p=1413#comment-4463 <strong>Why might someone want to follow 1,000+ people on Twitter?...</strong> There are two main drivers why people follow so many people. The one is ego. People (rightly) believe that they will get followers if they follow back. There are a few myths in social media - and this explains the other reason why people follow 1000 pl... Why might someone want to follow 1,000+ people on Twitter?…

There are two main drivers why people follow so many people. The one is ego. People (rightly) believe that they will get followers if they follow back. There are a few myths in social media – and this explains the other reason why people follow 1000 pl…

]]> By: The RAAKonteur #23 – On Quora, StumbleUpon and RSS – RAAK | Digital & Social Media Agency London http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/#comment-4265 The RAAKonteur #23 – On Quora, StumbleUpon and RSS – RAAK | Digital & Social Media Agency London Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:04:15 +0000 http://www.wewillraakyou.com/?p=1413#comment-4265 [...] Tweeted the formula on how to determine your rank in terms of followers on Twitter. Now as we pointed out before, simply counting followers is not the most useful metric of Twitter [...] [...] Tweeted the formula on how to determine your rank in terms of followers on Twitter. Now as we pointed out before, simply counting followers is not the most useful metric of Twitter [...]

]]> By: Jonnie Jensen http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/#comment-969 Jonnie Jensen Fri, 22 Oct 2010 13:00:38 +0000 http://www.wewillraakyou.com/?p=1413#comment-969 Bloody good post Wessel. Bloody good. Bloody good post Wessel. Bloody good.

]]> By: Wessel Van Rensburg http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/#comment-75 Wessel Van Rensburg Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:35:30 +0000 http://www.wewillraakyou.com/?p=1413#comment-75 This article also ties in with this post, bit from another angle. 'Twitter users not so social after all' http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/10/technology/twitter_users_active/index.htm This article also ties in with this post, bit from another angle.

‘Twitter users not so social after all’

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/10/technology/twitter_users_active/index.htm

]]> By: Wessel Van Rensburg http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/#comment-74 Wessel Van Rensburg Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:49:13 +0000 http://www.wewillraakyou.com/?p=1413#comment-74 Hi Edward, were super pleased to get a comment from you. You say: 'Plenty of argument that the small gesture of following back someone who flatters you with a follow is the right thing to do.' Well yes, but especially if they think they are actually going into a meaningful relationship, and not relegated to an neglected column in Tweetdeck I think. People seem to be following others to be polite or to encourage them to follow you in turn. All of which seem to me a distortion of the real worth of certain Twitter users' 'content'. I agree with you on the best way to connect, little beats considered comments on blogs and real interaction. Hi Edward, were super pleased to get a comment from you. You say:

‘Plenty of argument that the small gesture of following back someone who flatters you with a follow is the right thing to do.’

Well yes, but especially if they think they are actually going into a meaningful relationship, and not relegated to an neglected column in Tweetdeck I think.

People seem to be following others to be polite or to encourage them to follow you in turn. All of which seem to me a distortion of the real worth of certain Twitter users’ ‘content’.

I agree with you on the best way to connect, little beats considered comments on blogs and real interaction.

]]> By: edward boches http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/#comment-73 edward boches Fri, 05 Mar 2010 13:13:23 +0000 http://www.wewillraakyou.com/?p=1413#comment-73 That's why there's Tweetdeck. Plenty of argument that the small gesture of following back someone who flatters you with a follow is the right thing to do. And of course you can't really pay attention to thousands. But you can easily filter with tools like the deck. As Clay Shirky said years ago -- in fact he wrote a very similar section in Here Comes Everybody talking about internet celebrity -- it's not about an abundance of content, it's about having the right filtering systems. Personally, I don't follow everyone for the simple reason that I HATE AUTO DMS. If people didn't use them I'd follow all back. Instead I follow those who engage, share and add value. Then filter my must follows via lists and Tweetdeck. As for Facebook, that's another story all together. As they get less focused on what they were originally and try to mirror Twitter, they simply water themselves down, despite all the members they have. One more thing. This is the best way to connect: blogs, comments, dialog, real interaction. That’s why there’s Tweetdeck. Plenty of argument that the small gesture of following back someone who flatters you with a follow is the right thing to do. And of course you can’t really pay attention to thousands. But you can easily filter with tools like the deck. As Clay Shirky said years ago — in fact he wrote a very similar section in Here Comes Everybody talking about internet celebrity — it’s not about an abundance of content, it’s about having the right filtering systems. Personally, I don’t follow everyone for the simple reason that I HATE AUTO DMS. If people didn’t use them I’d follow all back. Instead I follow those who engage, share and add value. Then filter my must follows via lists and Tweetdeck. As for Facebook, that’s another story all together. As they get less focused on what they were originally and try to mirror Twitter, they simply water themselves down, despite all the members they have. One more thing. This is the best way to connect: blogs, comments, dialog, real interaction.

]]> By: Wessel van Rensburg http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/#comment-72 Wessel van Rensburg Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:54:18 +0000 http://www.wewillraakyou.com/?p=1413#comment-72 Hi Brian, I had a look at Twitter Grader, and read the post on how it works. It says: "1. Number of Followers: More followers leads to a higher Twitter Grade (all other things being equal). Yes, I agree that it’s easy to game this number, but we are looking at measuring reach and I did say all other things being equal. 2. Power of Followers: If you have people with a high Twitter Grade following you, it counts more than those with a low Twitter Grade following you. It’s a bit recursive, and we don’t get carried away with it, but it helps. 3. Updates: More updates generally leads to a higher grade — within reason. This does not mean you should be tweeting like a manic squirrel cranked up on caffeine and sugar. It won’t help either your Twitter Grade or your overall happiness in life. 4. Update Recency: Users that are more current (i.e. time elapsed since last tweet is low) generally get higher grades. 5. Follower/Following Ratio: The higher the ratio, the better. However, the weight of this particular factor decreases as the user accrues points for other factors (so, once a user gets to a high level of followers or a high level of engagement, the Follower/Following ratio counts less). 6. Engagement: The more a given user’s tweets are being retweeted, the more times the user is being referenced or cited, the higher the twitter grade. Further, the value of the engagement is higher based on who is being engaged. If a user with a very high Twitter Grade retweets, it counts more than if a spammy account with a very low grade retweets." I like the your interface, and like its simplicity and speed(although the speed of the calculation makes me suspicious - how do you so quickly return with knowlege of the follow rations of the people that follow me?). But I'm not sure your better than Klout. I have to say that point 5 and 6 strikes me at the the most important factors to take into account, and you put them last. Number 3 is just plan wrong, and number 1 is easy to game. Anybody can build their follower counts in no time. To take the user in the above example, you score the users marketingsus * Rank 31,085 out of 6,257,273 * Followers 6,872 * Following 6,968 * Updates 2,959 http://twitter.grader.com/marketingisus I however get ranked 260,000. http://twitter.grader.com/wildebees Sour grapes on my part? I think not. I think your just concentrating on the wrong metrics. The difference between followers and following is key. Even Chris Brogan recognizes that now and is unfollowing thousands. Hi Brian, I had a look at Twitter Grader, and read the post on how it works.

It says: “1. Number of Followers: More followers leads to a higher Twitter Grade (all other things being equal). Yes, I agree that it’s easy to game this number, but we are looking at measuring reach and I did say all other things being equal.

2. Power of Followers: If you have people with a high Twitter Grade following you, it counts more than those with a low Twitter Grade following you. It’s a bit recursive, and we don’t get carried away with it, but it helps.

3. Updates: More updates generally leads to a higher grade — within reason. This does not mean you should be tweeting like a manic squirrel cranked up on caffeine and sugar. It won’t help either your Twitter Grade or your overall happiness in life.

4. Update Recency: Users that are more current (i.e. time elapsed since last tweet is low) generally get higher grades.

5. Follower/Following Ratio: The higher the ratio, the better. However, the weight of this particular factor decreases as the user accrues points for other factors (so, once a user gets to a high level of followers or a high level of engagement, the Follower/Following ratio counts less).

6. Engagement: The more a given user’s tweets are being retweeted, the more times the user is being referenced or cited, the higher the twitter grade. Further, the value of the engagement is higher based on who is being engaged. If a user with a very high Twitter Grade retweets, it counts more than if a spammy account with a very low grade retweets.”

I like the your interface, and like its simplicity and speed(although the speed of the calculation makes me suspicious – how do you so quickly return with knowlege of the follow rations of the people that follow me?).

But I’m not sure your better than Klout. I have to say that point 5 and 6 strikes me at the the most important factors to take into account, and you put them last. Number 3 is just plan wrong, and number 1 is easy to game. Anybody can build their follower counts in no time.

To take the user in the above example, you score the users marketingsus

* Rank 31,085 out of 6,257,273
* Followers 6,872
* Following 6,968
* Updates 2,959
http://twitter.grader.com/marketingisus

I however get ranked 260,000. http://twitter.grader.com/wildebees

Sour grapes on my part? I think not. I think your just concentrating on the wrong metrics.

The difference between followers and following is key. Even Chris Brogan recognizes that now and is unfollowing thousands.

]]> By: Wessel van Rensburg http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/#comment-71 Wessel van Rensburg Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:39:45 +0000 http://www.wewillraakyou.com/?p=1413#comment-71 I don't deny that their are celebrities and others that do have conversations and that these do add real value, by making connections, energising people, getting information etc. But the resources for doing this is finite. Conversations are part of social media, but so is broadcasting. I will have a look at Twitter Grader. I don’t deny that their are celebrities and others that do have conversations and that these do add real value, by making connections, energising people, getting information etc. But the resources for doing this is finite. Conversations are part of social media, but so is broadcasting.

I will have a look at Twitter Grader.

]]> By: Brian Whalley http://wewillraakyou.com/2010/02/conversations-dont-scale/#comment-70 Brian Whalley Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:34:50 +0000 http://www.wewillraakyou.com/?p=1413#comment-70 Hi, I don't think that I agree with you here - There are some celebrities that I like that have frequent conversations with some followers at random through Twitter. For example, writer and director Kevin Smith is famous for talking to his fans every day for at least an hour, if not more. He's never replied to me personally or my questions, but I still really like following him because he replies to everyone else - I have the shared benefit of all of his responses to other fans asking him questions or commenting on his work. Thanks for the post though. You should add a comment on Twitter Grader as well at the end. Brian Whalley (Disclaimer: I work for HubSpot, the company that made Twitter Grader.) Hi,

I don’t think that I agree with you here – There are some celebrities that I like that have frequent conversations with some followers at random through Twitter. For example, writer and director Kevin Smith is famous for talking to his fans every day for at least an hour, if not more. He’s never replied to me personally or my questions, but I still really like following him because he replies to everyone else – I have the shared benefit of all of his responses to other fans asking him questions or commenting on his work.

Thanks for the post though. You should add a comment on Twitter Grader as well at the end.

Brian Whalley

(Disclaimer: I work for HubSpot, the company that made Twitter Grader.)

]]>