And if followed by an obvious spammer should we not block them and then let Twitter make it clear to other users how many times they've blocked. A few black marks against a spammer and they won't get followed back anymore.

This is like the feedback rating in ebay it encourages you to behave yourself.

I agree with Kevin, this should be a human solution.

I feel that a policy of banning people who Twitter thinks are spammers because of a metric rather than users who have my realistic reasons is a dangerous precendence and just causes grief and anguish. Let people self police in the first instance and then correct the exception circumstances. But hey it's your show ;-) just trying to give constructive feedback.

Seriously I can understand the temptation to automate but this is a slippery slope indeed.


On 11 Aug 2009, at 19:36, Kevin Mesiab wrote:

Step 1.) turn off email notifications (legitimat, but easily mitigated problem). Step 2.) getting spammed? Unfollow that user (question why you followed them in the first place).

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Kevin Mesiab <> wrote:
And here lies the slippery slope.

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 8:25 AM, owkaye <> wrote:

> If users paid due diligence to those they follow and only
> followed those people who demonstrate some value to them,
> follower churn would not exist. Period.

Obviously they won't so maybe it's time to deal with reality
rather than dreaming of a perfect world.


Kevin Mesiab
CEO, Mesiab Labs L.L.C.

Kevin Mesiab
CEO, Mesiab Labs L.L.C.

Reply via email to