Unfollow Friday, Redux
Seems to be going around. It’s your Twitter, do whatever the hell you want. Promise you, that be my plan.
Unfollow Friday, Part Three, Act LDXV, Version 4.7
Whenever I do this I nix mostly news, bots, RSS feeds – anything that’s push only. (Fare thee well Social Media Today; you’re still in the Reader). I also look at people, what value I get from what they tweet, very WIIFM per my Twitter rules.
My follow/unfollow strategy of the moment includes:
- Not giving two wits about your Klout score, though I’ve been tempted to peak at what influence PeerIndex says I don’t have, just to see.
- Automation overload. Tools are nice, scheduling works but too much of a good thing – that’s getting some more unfollows, especially since I can now Circle you on Google+. Until you figure out how to program and noise that up too.
- Platitudinal randomness. I like quotes, I get quotes but random tweets of “time is like an ocean, make your bed” aren’t moving my furniture these days.
- My streams a little organizationally challenged, so seeing if following lists makes things any easier.
- Profile pictures of bacon or kittens, that’s just cheating. Dancing, animated avatars, please say no.
- Content, engagement, fun, interest. Winner, winner, winner… that’s what I want, from a funny feed like OHnewsroom or a clever blogger who gets it, whether they tweet 10 or 50 times a day.
Insert whiny chorus of [whah whah 'need to get more from Twitter' whah] here. Think I’ve zapped a few dozen this week, moved a few people to Lists or Google+ instead. This is of course requires looking at the streams to see what’s what, which has another benefit: I’m noticing people again and actually taking the time to be social. Whataya know.
What moves you to break out the unfollow button? Besides posts like this.
Google+. One network to rule them all?
I used to think that what Facebook was doing ‘wrong’ was not giving people more control over their audiences, what they share with whom.
Is Twitter random?
I agree with most of Mitch Joel’s points on Twitter, but for the reason that Twitter is [not] random. People use Twitter for:
- Easy IM chatting tool with friends, share Tumblr posts.
- Lifestream to anyone or no one listening, except us slimy marketers of course.
- Business pros like to connect with other like-minded professionals, quickly and simply.
- Marketers want to pimp their wares and spammers want to give me free iPads and cheap Viagra.
I have a personal Twitter account that is interest-specific. Some nice friendships have developed as my friends and I chat, get to know each other. My 3HatsComm about is about networking with peers and potential clients. Nothing random about them.
Facebook is the reunion
Tisha Berg wrote something to that effect in a comment. Once the initial rush of connecting with old school chums, far flung family members, the fervor dies down. Fun to play your BFFs in some games, but after a while it’s about you: where you’ve been, posting what your kids are doing. Look at me.
When you open up Facebook to ‘Friend’ anyone – unless you put them in a List via the labyrinth of privacy settings – you run this risk of your boss seeing that nekid keg stand picture your idiot roommate from sophomore year decided to upload and tag. Beyond the embarrassing and career damaging, there’s the irrelevant… too many updates that have nothing to do with what interests me right now.
Google+ tries to Circle the ‘problem’
In creating its network Google counters the Facebook List with a Circle. The concept – other than to attract folks to its cloud and gather data to perfect search, sell ads - I think is to give me control so I can:
- Write any old thing I want to share with anyone.
- Post the ‘hey look at my EPIC World Changing blog’ link for everyone to ignore at their leisure.
- Maybe chat up with friends about my favorite TV shows with only those people on that page or hangout having access, other personal and professional connections being none the wiser that that’s really how I spend my time.
Emoticon for accessory. Or not: - Share the ‘cruising vacation wackiness photos’ with the few friends I trust enough not to rebroadcast or tag it, with privacy settings that mean it’s not findable anywhere else. - HA! Believe that, I have THE real estate deal for you; there’s a big SHARE link under everything.
Different is good
I do this already, separate work (LinkedIn, Twitter) from play (Facebook, other Twitter).
Google+ is very nice, but I’m not using it differently. Yet. First thing I did was create a Twitter-Business-Blogging friends circle. When it’s more open to the general public (see also, everyone else I know – none of whom give a rat’s ass about being ‘social’) I’ll still have different circles.
What’s still missing?
If it’s not the networks that are broken, then it’s the way I use them? Or rather the way I think of using them. TEHO. We’ll always use these our own ways, so what I may want to filter may not matter in any way to others. I’ve already liked how I’ve used G+ for some discussion, how it’s not being programmed or gamed – yet; just curious about control, what will be searchable and shareable to others, not to mention what happens when the API opens up as it evolves.
Are you using social networks differently? Do we need ONE network to rule them all?
Should I pimp my old posts?
I suck at pimping my own crap. Not sure what that is all about really, just have it ingrained in me not to brag, self-promote, toot my own horn too much. Which is good as I have no musical talent. Or vuvuzela.
Wave of the Now?
That’s my name for my social media category and why I am unsure about recycling older posts, as well as rethinking the ‘now’ part of it. (Future post pending.)
Fighting spam aside, I never understood turning off comments on older posts but then I’ll get tweaked when lured to a 2-year old post that is now out of date or irrelevant. Or if the post is still current, be frustrated by a blog owner still hyping it but not replying to open comments.
I do read and comment on ’older’ stuff - did so the other day as I get to know more of Margie’s thoughts on social media. But I find that the exception – not many seem to do so.
FWIW I’m already sharing older posts.
- I use the LinkedWithin plugin for this, probably should dig into some analytics to see if it’s working.
- I created a new category – which I may need to use more often - to revisit an older post with a newer one, to update it and see if it’s changed. Jack B does this, with an aggregate post of posts we hadn’t but should read posts. Clever.
I am curious about the value of promoting older stuff.
How far back is too far back, and are we better off bringing the ideas forward with a newer post? Do you get new comments, readers? If readers are lurkers, how is it helping you to see bumps in old posts are you getting new readers that way, more subscriptions or just current readers seeing the older stuff? Is there any downside?
I’m thinking of auto tweeting. Somebody stop me.
I’ve seen this ‘Tweet Old Post’ plugin. A lot.
From what I’ve seen I know I can customize it with a big fat warning. Wondering about the other settings, how low or infrequent can I go? Like once or twice a week? Which may seem silly but as I can never guarantee how much I’d be on Twitter, I don’t want to auto-hype my own posts 23 out of 34 tweets a day, especially since I don’t tweet that much. Just don’t want to put Tweet Old Post on overdrive, you know.
Think almost everyone’s using this plugin. Tips, tricks, advice? Please share.
Influence Shminfluence
Been considering influence and Twitter scoring a while as this post toiled away in drafts, then got ‘scooped’ by the damn New York Times over the weekend. Sheesh.
Is influence a myth?
Oprah liked a book, it sold millions, the publishers and book stores were happy (you KNOW they miss that action!). Influence, right? Friends know I’m a Disney World fan, so I get asked for tips and tricks, restaurant and shopping suggestions. If they act based upon my advice, influence yes?
Why did people buy the books Oprah picked? She’s a celebrity whom they trusted; viewers felt they had a relationship with her. People know I’ve been to WDW a lot, so they trust my experience.
How do you rate, measure that? Maybe that’s the illusion.
Jayme Soulati and Jenn Whinnem got me thinking about influence and Klout, a scoring system (see also: Twitter Grader, Peer Index) that looks at a person’s online influence.
Klout measures online influence by scoring social networks, specifically Twitter, Facebook and now LinkedIn. (YouTube, your blog, your comments, other online activities can all suck it.)
Twitter. My own like of Twitter certainly skews my appreciation for it, but I have no disolutions of its influence. I may get more posts RT these days, but it’s because of the networking the comments elswhere that have built relationships, grown an audience. Big name tweeters like a Brogan or Kawasaki may get 50-100 RTs per tweet or link but then, how many are automated, regurgited junk? How many actually get clicked? See also, a major site post that has 1) great headline and 2) 257 RTs and 3) 6 comments.
Facebook. My own FB bias taints my views on this as well. Work and play are separate; different networks, different audiences with ENTIRELY different goals. I have goals via Twitter and LinkedIn to build a network and reach clients; Facebook I visit to say ‘hi’ to friends, play Farkle once in a random mood. For me and many others, Facebook has no relevance to my professional influence, so I haven’t and won’t add it.
LinkedIn. Again with the different audiences, but with a fair amount of Twitter crossover. (Speaking of which, the autoposting every tweet to LI, please make it stop.) Added my LI today, suspect my score will drop as I’m not as active on LinkedIn, but at least it’s business and interest relevant, so there’s that.
What’s the problem?
- The scores can be gamed, rigged, artificially inflated. Google shows some 90K posts on how to raise your Klout score.
- Tweeters take time off. Collin Kromke’s Klout score went up while on vacation, Mark Schaefer’s down.
- Say who? It tells me that some of my influencers are people with whom I don’t engage (though the latest changes have it more accurate).
My biggest problem, aside from Facebook: Klout and other tools don’t measure the Why, motivations we have for sharing something: Am I tweeting or LinkedIn only to curry favor with an A-lister that’ll ignore me the rest of the time? Is it boredom, interest? Was the tweet actually read, clicked? Is it because you’re part of a Tribe?
To be fair having a ‘standard’ unit of measurement has its place. It’s a work in progress, Klout is a fair judge of my Twitter usage; I’m just not convinced what it measures is influence. Thoughts?
Twitter Rules, Revisited
Thinking a lot about Twitter – as if all the links don’t give me away – it’s my social network of choice. NO I don’t want to marry it and make little Twitter babies, but it’s still gotta be my fave right after blogs.
Once upon a time..
There were my first Twitter rules. “When I tweet my blog post I will warn you that it is my blog post, so that you can decide to read or ignore at your leisure.“
- I still think 100% automation bites the big one, but I’ve already said I was wrong about scheduling.
- I have now added Brian’s Follow Back on the list of NOT, along with vile Auto-DMs.
- I still don’t tweet about lunch but once in a while, I’ll tweet about food.
Just say no.
While I may not have 30 reasons I won’t follow you, I still have a few rules for why I don’t ‘like’ or ‘connect’ with just anyone and everyone.
- I say no to the needy who also want to be my Facebook friend, connect on LinkedIn.
- Don’t care about your Klout score, but usually I say no to those with lopsided follow/follower ratios, off kilter tweet stats.
- I probably say no to those with no bios, no links, or too many links in their bio. Not always deal breakers, but gives me second thoughts.
- I say no to following eggs and tend to block porny Gravatars. See also, Joey Strawn’s how to write a crappy Twitter profile.
More signs you might be an unfollowed tweeter..
- If you tweet nothing but hashtag vomit, add 23 tags to every tweet.
- If you add your own biz hashtag to every damn tweet. Eyeroll.
- If you tweet nothing but FourSquare check-ins.
- If you tweet nothing but feeds from your other sites.
- If you retweet yourself all the time. Like running an ad saying, “Congratulations, you’re following a douchebag.”
- If you tweet nothing but RTs.
- If they never attribute the original source or tweeter, that’s tacky.
- If they’re never, ever personalized, file that one under “Hell no, I won’t follow.”
- If you tweet nothing but uplifting quotes. Now if they’re mean and snarky, or overheard in the newsroom hilarity, we’re in business.
- If you tweet too much about your stats: comments, tweets, follows, the nobodycares lists and rankings.
How dumb was I?
Don’t care. I have moved some more ‘personal’ to my business tweets in efforts to strike a better balance, happily cheering the Braves and LSU or chatting wine once in a while. There is a line somewhere, don’t want to scare the fish away with evenings of ‘OMG the fail.. what is the bleepery? I blanking hate this bloody bleep” rants and ravings.
Bottom line: I am so glad I joined Twitter. If nothing else I get to baffle followers with my texting slang, that’s always fun. FWIW.
What are your Twitter rules? Where do you draw your follow and unfollow lines?
Photo credit: Funny Blaugh comic.