I agree my comparison to dictatorships is a stretch, but I was in a
poetic mood and trying to emphasize the point that clarity is better
than ambiguity. Twitter is obviously doing a tremendous job dealing
with their explosive growth and dynamic nature of this new medium
they've created. That said, capricious rules are also clearly as much
an obstacle to growth as the problems (ie, spam) they are intended to
prevent. When considerable investments in accounts are nullified in
the blink of an eye by suspensions for which no notice, reason, or
remediation is offered, entrepreneurs, marketers, investors, and
individuals that could be great assets to the community lose faith and
trust in continuing to be part of it.
> The issue is a quick follow and then unfollowing if not reciprocated.
Would be very helpful to know the definition of "quick" as relates to
following churn suspensions.
As far as how general "bulk unfollow" relates to the type of patterned
unfollowing that constitutes "following churn": If a user is inspired
by Scoble's post to wipe their friends list clean the same week they
have added hundreds of followers, it is unclear if they risk
suspension? Seems such a sequence lead to suspension of a friend's
account (though of course one does not receive any feedback on the
exact reason for suspension and she may not be interpreting the