The summary is I propose that the follow limits be dependent on whether a user is following an individual or not. It should only count against me if the user is not following me already and I try to follow them. :-) Jesse
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Abraham Williams <4bra...@gmail.com> wrote: > Can someone tweet a summery to @abraham? :-P > Thanks, > Abraham > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 00:28, Jesse Stay <jesses...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Let's discuss the follow limits. I feel, as developer of a tool that >> allows people to auto-follow, I have a bit of insight into this. While >> there are many, many legitimate users that auto-follow others, and have good >> reason to do so, some are using it as a way to game the system, build >> followers quickly, break the Twitter TOS, and reduce the meaning of follower >> numbers for many other users just using the service legitimately. I see >> this daily, amongst a few of my own users, and while, due to our privacy >> policy I can't share who they are, I do have some suggestions that would >> make the API follow limits make a little more sense. Maybe you guys can >> provide more insight. >> >> -Currently the follow per day limit is 1,000 follows per user per day. >> There is no limit on the number of unfollows a user can do per day (that I >> know of), and it appears as though there is also a limit of around 10% for >> the number of users a person can follow more than follow them back. The >> users taking advantage of Twitter have figured this out. So here's what >> they do: >> >> A "gamer"'s typical activity is that they will follow as many people as >> they can - most up to the 1,000 limit they're allowed per day, until they >> hit the ratio of 10%. The higher the follower base they gain, the longer >> they're able to do this. They then hope a good portion of those 1,000 >> people follow back. Those that don't use tools like mine (which weren't >> intended to be used this way) to unfollow everyone who is not following them >> back. This is often much greater than 1,000 for the users that are really >> good at it. The process then starts over. They'll use tools like >> Hummingbird (Google it) and Twollo to find people and automatically go out >> and follow them. This is why I refuse to create auto-follow filters to find >> new people on my service. It's way too spammy if you ask me. >> >> Why do they do this? 2 reasons: 1, "supposedly" having more followers >> means more visits and clicks in whatever you're trying to promote. (I don't >> believe this) and 2, many of these people also have auto-DM set up to send >> links and messages to each person that follows them back. Back when I >> offered this service (we disabled it for this exact reason) people told me >> they were seeing significant clicks on the links they would send to people >> via DM after they followed them. Therefore, more follows==more clicks==more >> revenue. I don't blame them if that's what they're really seeing. >> >> So for this reason I think having limits in place is a *good* thing. I >> don't think the follow limit is in place due to traffic reasons, since there >> are many more calls that cause more traffic on the API and there is no limit >> to unfollows, so I really think Twitter is doing this for the purpose of >> reducing spam and "gaming" of Twitter. This is a good thing. >> >> However, I think Twitter may be approaching the limits the wrong way. >> Here's what I think would be more effective, and beneficial for the >> legitimate users that want to follow back and at the same time not allow >> those who want to game the system to use the methods I described. Twitter >> needs to impose limits based on whether the individual is following the user >> back or not. >> >> For instance, if I follow @dacort and he is following me back, that >> shouldn't count against me as a hit against my follow limit. However, if I >> try to follow @dacort and he is not following me back, it should count >> against me as a hit against my limit. With this, users could easily >> auto-follow back if they choose to, and it would still be difficult for the >> users trying to game the system and spam Twitter. In fact, you could >> significantly *reduce* the limit this way and make it virtually impossible >> for these users to use Twitter in that manner. If you were to look at the >> relationship between the users when counting against limits, you could >> probably reduce the follow/day limit all the way to around 200 per day >> instead of 1,000 per day. I don't see any reason for the 10% >> follow/follower ratio with a low limit such as that. >> >> However, as stands, the more followers you get, if you are using Twitter >> legitimately, you have no way to extend the courtesy back if you choose to >> do so, since after a certain point you will be following many more than >> 1,000 users per day. And even if you aren't, it will take an extremely long >> time for many individuals to finally catch up to follow those following them >> if they want to at 1,000 follows per day. >> >> I know there are some that disagree with the auto-follow concept. >> However, I also know most of you also want Twitter to be an open >> environment where people can choose to use it as they please. Doug, Alex, >> etc. I'd love it if you guys could at least consider changing the follow >> limits as I mentioned. The current limits are doing nothing to prevent the >> spammers - my suggestions I believe will, and will keep it an open >> environment for the rest of us. >> >> Sorry for the long discourse - I would really love to hear others thoughts >> and suggestions. >> >> @Jesse >> > > > > -- > Abraham Williams | Community | http://web608.org > Hacker | http://abrah.am | http://twitter.com/abraham > Project | http://fireeagle.labs.poseurtech.com > This email is: [ ] blogable [x] ask first [ ] private. > Sent from Madison, WI, United States >
