RE: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
Of course, if I disable the new follower notices then the spammers have won... I guess I could use the API to create a summary report of the day's new followers, hey... I like the notices. I don't read them all, but when I do their followers/following numbers often give them away. There's good stuff too. People you know, etc, and I just checked and here's another one of these: 0 followers 0 tweets following 1 person Anyway, I no longer look at follower lists - even my own - because of all the junk. Following lists are where the value is. Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:51:54 -0800 Subject: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation From: dpr...@gmail.com To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com Honestly, I don't understand why people break their heads over who follow them. It does not make an ounce of difference if an entire army of spam bots or follower churners follow your account. They can't DM you if you don't follow back. They can @reply you whether they follow you or not. In fact, if you are stuck at a magical following limit, then those followers can enable you to follow more accounts. The only small irritation is the new follower email notification that Twitter sends out. Just disable those notifications, and you will never even know that you are followed by spammers, scammers, and churners. On Jan 28, 6:56 am, DenisioDelBoro alya...@gmail.com wrote: On 28 ÑÎ×, 06:42, Ken Dobruskin k...@cimas.ch wrote: When I am followed by a bot, or even a human who has no actual interest in my tweets but is only trying for a follow back, I regard it as an unsolicited message. This happens way too much and as a victim, I don't care if it's been done massively. Spam is spam and fake following - on whatever scale - not only uses resources but complicates analysis of the social network. Twitter has allowed the follow mechanism to be repurposed as a simple attention grabbing measure, but they tell us that the rules will evolve. It is also within their power to keep the bot armies at bay. Who's talking about bots following real people here? _ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
I think if both parties opt in, then automation is ok with follows. but I would like others feedback on that too.. 2010/1/28 DenisioDelBoro alya...@gmail.com On 28 янв, 06:42, Ken Dobruskin k...@cimas.ch wrote: When I am followed by a bot, or even a human who has no actual interest in my tweets but is only trying for a follow back, I regard it as an unsolicited message. This happens way too much and as a victim, I don't care if it's been done massively. Spam is spam and fake following - on whatever scale - not only uses resources but complicates analysis of the social network. Twitter has allowed the follow mechanism to be repurposed as a simple attention grabbing measure, but they tell us that the rules will evolve. It is also within their power to keep the bot armies at bay. Who's talking about bots following real people here? -- Dale Merritt Fol.la MeDia, LLC
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
the specific example you give seems fine. On the other hand when you start to talk about a thousand(s), it starts to raise valid questions for anyone who monitors this group. On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:02 AM, DenisioDelBoro alya...@gmail.com wrote: First of all, there is only one form of spam - it's *unsolicited* messages sent massively. Second of all, tell me, please, in what way creating, let's say, 100 accounts just for tweeting weather forecasts for different cities is a spam? I'm not talking about mentioning there random nicknames or something like that to get new followers, of course. Just pure forecast, without any links. Third of all, why do you think those RSS feeds will be useless? Maybe it's more convenient for some users to get updates with Twitter than with Google Reader. On 27 янв, 18:30, Dale Folla MeDia mogul...@gmail.com wrote: the only possible reasons someone would have to create that many accounts would be to spam in one form or another. There should be other ways to skin that cat.. You could not keep up with that many accounts unless you sent out huge amounts of useless RSS feeeds just to gain followers so you can mass dm them... On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:16 AM, Andrew Badera and...@badera.us wrote: I would point them to examples of other apps (local news spammers come to mind) that have recently been blacklisted. That aside, I for one am 100% opposed to giving anyone this sort of tool. Not that certain other people on this list haven't already done so for profit, sadly. ∞ Andy Badera ∞ +1 518-641-1280 Google Voice ∞ This email is: [ ] bloggable [x] ask first [ ] private ∞ Google me:http://www.google.com/search?q=andrew%20badera On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Jonathan Markwell j.l.markw...@inuda.com wrote: Hi All, Would be interested to hear both the community's opinion on this and the official Twitter view. I have a client that wants to create thousands of new accounts that they can use to send out a wide variety of niche interest tweets. They already have a quote from an outsourcing company that can do the work and are keen to go ahead. The accounts will, for the most part, be automated but I'm encouraging them to ensure each gets at least some human participation in them on a regular basis. I'm apprehensive about this and I'm trying to disuade them from going ahead. I'm not convinced that accounts that are primarily automated, especially when set up on this scale can add that much value to the ecosystem. Their feeling is quite the opposite and they believe the audience they are working to provide for will find this extremely valuable. In addition they are confident, and have some data to back it up, that what they are creating will bring a huge number of new real users to Twitter. What are your thoughts on this? Jon. -- Jonathan Markwell Engineer | Founder | Connector Inuda Innovations Ltd, Brighton, UK Web application development support Twitter Facebook integration specialists http://inuda.com Organising the world's first events for the Twitter developer Community http://TwitterDeveloperNest.com http://twitterdevelopernest.com/ http://twitterdevelopernest.com/ Providing a nice little place to work in the middle of Brighton - http://theskiff.org Measuring your brand's visibility on the social web - http://HowSociable.com http://howsociable.com/ http://howsociable.com/ mob: 07766 021 485 | tel: 01273 704 549 | fax: 01273 376 953 skype: jlmarkwell | twitter:http://twitter.com/jot -- Dale Merritt Fol.la MeDia, LLC -- Dale Merritt Fol.la MeDia, LLC
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:02 AM, DenisioDelBoro alya...@gmail.com wrote: First of all, there is only one form of spam - it's *unsolicited* messages sent massively. Second of all, tell me, please, in what way creating, let's say, 100 accounts just for tweeting weather forecasts for different cities is a spam? I'm not talking about mentioning there random nicknames or something like that to get new followers, of course. Just pure forecast, without any links. Third of all, why do you think those RSS feeds will be useless? Maybe it's more convenient for some users to get updates with Twitter than with Google Reader. I don't see how creating, let's say, 100 accounts just for tweeting weather forecasts for different cities fits in with the Twitter spirit, which is humans talking to other humans over the messaging system. For example, here in Portland, we have a hashtag, #pdxtst (PDX Twitter Storm Team) where we talk about the sometimes unusual weather in this normally boring rainy place. It's people talking about the weather. We had an unexpected snowstorm a few weeks back, and Mayor Sam Adams got on Twitter and gave traffic and Tri-Met updates. I doubt very seriously if the folks in the #pdxtst chat would have appreciated some bot spewing the National Weather Service warnings or the stuff coming from the TV weather crews. Those crews were, in fact, on Twitter conversing with people! Fortunately, this all happened before the texting while driving ban went into effect. Maybe what you propose is simply annoying and not spam, but don't be too terribly surprised if you build it and see people blocking you, rather than simply not following. I unfollow bots often and block when something gets annoying enough. But Twitter isn't intended to be an aggregator! On 27 янв, 18:30, Dale Folla MeDia mogul...@gmail.com wrote: the only possible reasons someone would have to create that many accounts would be to spam in one form or another. There should be other ways to skin that cat.. You could not keep up with that many accounts unless you sent out huge amounts of useless RSS feeeds just to gain followers so you can mass dm them... On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:16 AM, Andrew Badera and...@badera.us wrote: I would point them to examples of other apps (local news spammers come to mind) that have recently been blacklisted. That aside, I for one am 100% opposed to giving anyone this sort of tool. Not that certain other people on this list haven't already done so for profit, sadly. ∞ Andy Badera ∞ +1 518-641-1280 Google Voice ∞ This email is: [ ] bloggable [x] ask first [ ] private ∞ Google me:http://www.google.com/search?q=andrew%20badera On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Jonathan Markwell j.l.markw...@inuda.com wrote: Hi All, Would be interested to hear both the community's opinion on this and the official Twitter view. I have a client that wants to create thousands of new accounts that they can use to send out a wide variety of niche interest tweets. They already have a quote from an outsourcing company that can do the work and are keen to go ahead. The accounts will, for the most part, be automated but I'm encouraging them to ensure each gets at least some human participation in them on a regular basis. I'm apprehensive about this and I'm trying to disuade them from going ahead. I'm not convinced that accounts that are primarily automated, especially when set up on this scale can add that much value to the ecosystem. Their feeling is quite the opposite and they believe the audience they are working to provide for will find this extremely valuable. In addition they are confident, and have some data to back it up, that what they are creating will bring a huge number of new real users to Twitter. What are your thoughts on this? Jon. -- Jonathan Markwell Engineer | Founder | Connector Inuda Innovations Ltd, Brighton, UK Web application development support Twitter Facebook integration specialists http://inuda.com Organising the world's first events for the Twitter developer Community http://TwitterDeveloperNest.comhttp://twitterdevelopernest.com/ Providing a nice little place to work in the middle of Brighton - http://theskiff.org Measuring your brand's visibility on the social web - http://HowSociable.comhttp://howsociable.com/ mob: 07766 021 485 | tel: 01273 704 549 | fax: 01273 376 953 skype: jlmarkwell | twitter:http://twitter.com/jot -- Dale Merritt Fol.la MeDia, LLC -- M. Edward (Ed) Borasky http://borasky-research.net I've always regarded nature as the clothing of God. ~Alan Hovhaness
RE: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
From: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com [mailto:twitter-development-t...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of M. Edward (Ed) Borasky Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 12:38 PM To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation But Twitter isn't intended to be an aggregator! Says you Ed, at the end of the day Twitter is whatever it's users intend it to be. If one of my friend buys those stupid scales that posts to twitter their weight everyday, I have the choice to follow or block. If you don't want the national automated weather service - simple don't follow. Cheers, Dean
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
On 1/27/2010 10:02 AM, DenisioDelBoro wrote: First of all, there is only one form of spam - it's *unsolicited* messages sent massively. Second of all, tell me, please, in what way creating, let's say, 100 accounts just for tweeting weather forecasts for different cities is a spam? I'm not talking about mentioning there random nicknames or something like that to get new followers, of course. Just pure forecast, without any links. Third of all, why do you think those RSS feeds will be useless? Maybe it's more convenient for some users to get updates with Twitter than with Google Reader. 1. Pure forecasts could be handled by one account sending out multiple forecasts coded for a particular area though hashtags. You would probably have to whitelist your ip, but then again you would have to do the same if you were mass creating accounts just for each to forecast one city or area 2. An invited e-mail can quickly turn into an uninvited e-mail, and that goes the same for spam. And you are ignoring the strain that those accounts place on the Twitter servers themselves. 3. RSS feeds are not useless, but there is a time and a place. You sound to me like a guy who only has a hammer in his toolbox and is looking for a nail. Rather than trying to cram everything into Twitter you should be looking for the proper way to integrate it into your services.
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
just a correction about something I wrote. I don't think RSS themselves are useless in context with integrating them with some valid purpose. On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:11 AM, John Meyer john.l.me...@gmail.com wrote: On 1/27/2010 10:02 AM, DenisioDelBoro wrote: First of all, there is only one form of spam - it's *unsolicited* messages sent massively. Second of all, tell me, please, in what way creating, let's say, 100 accounts just for tweeting weather forecasts for different cities is a spam? I'm not talking about mentioning there random nicknames or something like that to get new followers, of course. Just pure forecast, without any links. Third of all, why do you think those RSS feeds will be useless? Maybe it's more convenient for some users to get updates with Twitter than with Google Reader. 1. Pure forecasts could be handled by one account sending out multiple forecasts coded for a particular area though hashtags. You would probably have to whitelist your ip, but then again you would have to do the same if you were mass creating accounts just for each to forecast one city or area 2. An invited e-mail can quickly turn into an uninvited e-mail, and that goes the same for spam. And you are ignoring the strain that those accounts place on the Twitter servers themselves. 3. RSS feeds are not useless, but there is a time and a place. You sound to me like a guy who only has a hammer in his toolbox and is looking for a nail. Rather than trying to cram everything into Twitter you should be looking for the proper way to integrate it into your services. -- Dale Merritt Fol.la MeDia, LLC
RE: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
+1, Ed. Nice post. The humans will win! Whether every RSS feed, weather station, search query, refrigerator, etc is allowed to be turned into a twitter bot is a policy decision for Twitter. I like to think that Twitter would prefer to be an original source of unique and meaningful content and not just a dump for low grade data. First of all, there is only one form of spam - it's *unsolicited* messages sent massively. When I am followed by a bot, or even a human who has no actual interest in my tweets but is only trying for a follow back, I regard it as an unsolicited message. This happens way too much and as a victim, I don't care if it's been done massively. Spam is spam and fake following - on whatever scale - not only uses resources but complicates analysis of the social network. Twitter has allowed the follow mechanism to be repurposed as a simple attention grabbing measure, but they tell us that the rules will evolve. It is also within their power to keep the bot armies at bay. Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 09:37:43 -0800 Subject: Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation From: zzn...@gmail.com To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:02 AM, DenisioDelBoro alya...@gmail.com wrote: First of all, there is only one form of spam - it's *unsolicited* messages sent massively. Second of all, tell me, please, in what way creating, let's say, 100 accounts just for tweeting weather forecasts for different cities is a spam? I'm not talking about mentioning there random nicknames or something like that to get new followers, of course. Just pure forecast, without any links. Third of all, why do you think those RSS feeds will be useless? Maybe it's more convenient for some users to get updates with Twitter than with Google Reader. I don't see how creating, let's say, 100 accounts just for tweeting weather forecasts for different cities fits in with the Twitter spirit, which is humans talking to other humans over the messaging system. For example, here in Portland, we have a hashtag, #pdxtst (PDX Twitter Storm Team) where we talk about the sometimes unusual weather in this normally boring rainy place. It's people talking about the weather. We had an unexpected snowstorm a few weeks back, and Mayor Sam Adams got on Twitter and gave traffic and Tri-Met updates. I doubt very seriously if the folks in the #pdxtst chat would have appreciated some bot spewing the National Weather Service warnings or the stuff coming from the TV weather crews. Those crews were, in fact, on Twitter conversing with people! Fortunately, this all happened before the texting while driving ban went into effect. Maybe what you propose is simply annoying and not spam, but don't be too terribly surprised if you build it and see people blocking you, rather than simply not following. I unfollow bots often and block when something gets annoying enough. But Twitter isn't intended to be an aggregator! On 27 янв, 18:30, Dale Folla MeDia mogul...@gmail.com wrote: the only possible reasons someone would have to create that many accounts would be to spam in one form or another. There should be other ways to skin that cat.. You could not keep up with that many accounts unless you sent out huge amounts of useless RSS feeeds just to gain followers so you can mass dm them... On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:16 AM, Andrew Badera and...@badera.us wrote: I would point them to examples of other apps (local news spammers come to mind) that have recently been blacklisted. That aside, I for one am 100% opposed to giving anyone this sort of tool. Not that certain other people on this list haven't already done so for profit, sadly. ∞ Andy Badera ∞ +1 518-641-1280 Google Voice ∞ This email is: [ ] bloggable [x] ask first [ ] private ∞ Google me:http://www.google.com/search?q=andrew%20badera On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Jonathan Markwell j.l.markw...@inuda.com wrote: Hi All, Would be interested to hear both the community's opinion on this and the official Twitter view. I have a client that wants to create thousands of new accounts that they can use to send out a wide variety of niche interest tweets. They already have a quote from an outsourcing company that can do the work and are keen to go ahead. The accounts will, for the most part, be automated but I'm encouraging them to ensure each gets at least some human participation in them on a regular basis. I'm apprehensive about this and I'm trying to disuade them from going ahead. I'm not convinced that accounts that are primarily automated, especially when set up on this scale can add that much value to the ecosystem. Their feeling is quite the opposite and they believe the audience they are working to provide for will find this extremely valuable. In addition they are confident, and have some data to back it up
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
Every time I saw this thread in my inbox my blood pressure rose. I just took the time to read it and there is actually some valid content in here. I run bots. Political campaign stuff, adaptively speaks in hashtags, low frequency, provides some value. We ask people to NOT follow them as they're just supposed to be announcing occasional links, but they still gather real people. Go figure ... and I relentlessly prune autofollow junk. My teeth are white enough and I give a little round shit about forex trading. The bots do a lot more than messaging - like the new Twitter contributor feature we permit trusted followers (yay, lists!) to speak via a set of direct message commands. Less trusted users can access a pallet of canned responses - MSG [SUBJECT] userid. The whole point is to harness willing supporters but provide them guidelines. Followers can also sign themselves up for lists - SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE. So this is how they get direct messages - it's for our very committed, responsive activists. We're moving into a low volume, realistic retweet service. It's gotta be something that the real human would RT anyway, so we're just helping them to find good content from candidates campaigns they like anyway. I saw this thread and I thought Great, Britbot will be multiplying like bunnies. After some consideration ... It would be nice if a serious web site, say one of the climate activist sites, could at the time of sign up ask for OR create a new Twitter ID for the person joining. This *would* be a Twitter API call, it would have a human associated, and we'd be herding those humans into using the semi-automated systems like the one I describe above. I also do some large scale automated messaging. Twitter doesn't seem to mind - it's basically data going into hashtags for each Congressional district. It's not entirely stable and operational, but we're doing things like providing links to the incumbent challenger's Twitter IDs, should they be known, providing links to the FEC data, etc. We spend a lot of time gather it, the content would almost always be high value in the eyes of someone looking at the tag, and the sole exception seems to be those poor people in Delaware, which has an at large Congressman. #DEAL :-( I've considered getting one our our people to mass register some scheme of accounts for each Congressional district and then making it do stuff. The jury is still out on this - we have lots to do, this is high value but long lead time before it enhances our reputation. I'll make some move on this before the election, but maybe not till midsummer. The sales bots ... meh. If they just follow and they're responding to a keyword I use I block 'em. It would be a lot less annoying if they'd follow, hang for 72 hours or something, and then drop me. OK, enough talk about development, time to actually go DO some ... 2010/1/27 Ken Dobruskin k...@cimas.ch +1, Ed. Nice post. The humans will win! Whether every RSS feed, weather station, search query, refrigerator, etc is allowed to be turned into a twitter bot is a policy decision for Twitter. I like to think that Twitter would prefer to be an original source of unique and meaningful content and not just a dump for low grade data. First of all, there is only one form of spam - it's *unsolicited* messages sent massively. When I am followed by a bot, or even a human who has no actual interest in my tweets but is only trying for a follow back, I regard it as an unsolicited message. This happens way too much and as a victim, I don't care if it's been done massively. Spam is spam and fake following - on whatever scale - not only uses resources but complicates analysis of the social network. Twitter has allowed the follow mechanism to be repurposed as a simple attention grabbing measure, but they tell us that the rules will evolve. It is also within their power to keep the bot armies at bay. -- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 09:37:43 -0800 Subject: Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation From: zzn...@gmail.com To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:02 AM, DenisioDelBoro alya...@gmail.com wrote: First of all, there is only one form of spam - it's *unsolicited* messages sent massively. Second of all, tell me, please, in what way creating, let's say, 100 accounts just for tweeting weather forecasts for different cities is a spam? I'm not talking about mentioning there random nicknames or something like that to get new followers, of course. Just pure forecast, without any links. Third of all, why do you think those RSS feeds will be useless? Maybe it's more convenient for some users to get updates with Twitter than with Google Reader. I don't see how creating, let's say, 100 accounts just for tweeting weather forecasts for different cities fits in with the Twitter spirit, which is humans talking to other humans over
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: Mass account creation
Local news is considered spam if it is annoying. People often think they're being useful by feeding such stuff as police and fire RSS feeds into Twitter robotically, but in reality, the people who want to subscribe to those feeds have done so precisely because they didn't want to get spammed. The rest of us think it's annoying and hit the spam report button. Now *news* news - human language tweeted by real live humans - isn't spam. On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 8:15 AM, DenisioDelBoro alya...@gmail.com wrote: Since when local news are considered spam? On 7 янв, 15:16, Andrew Badera and...@badera.us wrote: I would point them to examples of other apps (local news spammers come to mind) that have recently been blacklisted. -- M. Edward (Ed) Borasky http://borasky-research.net I've always regarded nature as the clothing of God. ~Alan Hovhaness
