Personally, I don't protect my tweets and can't think of a single time I've regretted it. Also, I've only come across three people who have protected theirs. In each case, they followed me and I wanted to check them out to see if I should follow them. Being presented with the little padlock was unpleasant, but I chalked it down to inexperience/paranoia, requested permission to follow them and carried on.
What do others think? On 28/02/10 18:02, Joel S wrote: > Honestly, this is the first time I've heard that setting the privacy setting > on means it's a very bad idea and sends a negative message. > > Protected tweeting only means that you control who reads your tweets. I'd > rather have a massive unfollowing. That way, I get to keep those who really > want read my tweets. :) > > --- In [email protected], Eugenio Perea<euge...@...> wrote: > >> In my neck of the woods, that is a very bad idea. It sends out a very >> negative message and usually results in massive unfollowing. Spammers >> don't even register if you don't follow them back, which leads us to >> another topic: not everyone who follows you must be followed back, nor >> should you expect the reverse. As the old hands say: Twitter is not >> Facebook. >> I'm @eperea, by the way. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Eugenio >> >> On 28/02/10 15:57, Joel S wrote: >> >>> Also, it might be best to initially protect your tweets to ward off >>> spammers. >>> >>> >> > > >
