Skip to main content

How to Defend Twitter's Spam-Fighting Follow Throttling

So, the twittersphere is in an uproar about those dropped follower counts. Is everyone more afraid of the lost high-count vanity or that so many people follow without thought that we might never regain many of the legitimate follows? Either way, there is a lot of complaining about the apparently service mishap from the company that we shell over so none of our hard earned dollars to. The mistake is one thing, but I see quite a bit of sentiment against the very method they undertook to combat the spam problem. I challenge that claim, because I think they're on the right track limiting follows, and I'm going to explain why.

For Popular People This Means...


You're popular by how many people follow you, not the other way around. You can go on your way, with thousands of people hanging on your every toilet flush, and Twitter can still limit those damn spammers from following you along with ten-thousand other ego filled, txt-fingered masters of the twitterverse.

For "Community Managers" This Means...

Now, ReadWriteWeb makes a claim that so-called "community managers" are harmed by these changes. Examples include Comcast, JetBlue, and Pandora, who use Twitter to keep in touch with their customer base. Now, kudos to some random guy at each of these corporations signing up under his employer's name. However, a reasonable use case falling under this category of twitter account just shouldn't be worried with how many people they can follow. Just like the populars, its all about how many people are listening to you, because what those peasents have to say doesn't even register to you.

No one is reading closely to a timeline filled by thousands of follows!

For Spammers This Means...

Don't follow thousands of people when only a couple dozen morons fall for your bullshit.

For Twitter This Means...

Discourage the need for any legitimate uses of massive follow lists, you blue bird lovers. The value of following anyone breaks down soon after hitting three digits, so figure out why people are doing that in the first place. There is a small set of reasons that are even conceivably plausible.

Heavy twitter users who have migrated over to IM or TXT based usage may have discovered a nearly hidden feature about your follow lists: it is two tiered. That's right, you have important people and everyone else, but this is only revealed if you start to use IM or TXT and filter the updates you get, likely to reduce phone charges. I found a different usage, because limiting the updates was great, even when I have unlimited txt on my plan. When I started using desktop clients more often than my phone, I wanted that back. Bring this to the forefront and let us have our active follows and our passive follows. We should probably only care to see our passive follows on some broad timeline, versus our narrow timeline. While you're at it twitter, lets make this taggable, but that's a whole other story.

Aside from this, the only other reason I see is the number of things you can't do on twitter without explicitly following someone, or being followed by them. Open up direct messages (optionally), even without follows. Let us do more without following people. Of course, the addition of passive follows, as I mentioned previously, would do just as well to fix this.

The number one benefit these changes would have would come from expanding the notification options to ignore the passive follows. That is, don't tell me if someone is following me passively, because they don't really care about me, so I don't really care about them. They can put whatever restrictions they want on active follows, within reason, and we can all still keep track of thousands of twitterers, without looking like spammers. All you need to do is attack the number one reason spammers mass-follow: they're abusing twitter to send plain old fashioned e-mail spam, with a very crappy costume.

In The End

Summing up with the bold lines:
  • No one is reading closely to a timeline filled by thousands of follows!
  • The value of following anyone breaks down soon after hitting three digits
  • they're abusing twitter to send plain old fashioned e-mail spam, with a very crappy costume
Concluding easily that automated checks and limits on following lots of people is fine, because only spammers have a real reason to do it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this. CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer.  One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC? It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on

The Range of Content on Planet Python

I've gotten a number of requests lately to contribute only Python related material to the Planet Python feeds and to be honest these requests have both surprised and insulted me, but they've continued. I am pretty sure they've come from a very small number of people, but they have become consistent. This is probably because of my current habit of writing about NaNoWriMo every day and those who aren't interested not looking forward to having the rest of the month reading about my novel. Planet Python will be getting a feed of only relevant posts in the future, but I'm going to be honest: I am kind of upset about it. I don't care if anyone thinks it is unreasonable of me to be upset about it, because the truth is Planet Python means something to me. It was probably the first thing I did that I considered "being part of the community" when I submitted my meager RSS feed to be added some seven years ago. My blog and my name on the list of authors at Plan

Pythonic Defined

Introduction Losing is Good Strings Dictionaries Conclusion Introduction Veterans and novices alike of Python will hear the term "pythonic" thrown around, and even a number of the veterans don't know what it means. There are times I do not know what it means, but that doesn't mean I can define a pretty good idea of what "pythonic" really means. Now, it has been defined at times as being whatever the BDFL decides, but we'll pull that out of the picture. I want to talk about what the word means for us today, and how it applied to what we do in the real world. Languages have their strengths and their idioms (ways of doing things), and when you exploit those you embrace the heart of that language. You can often tell when a programmer writing in one language is actually more comfortable with another, because the code they right is telltale of the other language. Java developers are notorious for writing Java in every language they get their hands on. Ho