“Being a Twitter snob is a good thing,” according to Mitch Joel. Joel’s “snobbism” consists of selectively following far fewer people than follow him on Twitter. He believes “who you follow adds to your credibility.” And a selective list adds value for the lucky few whom you choose to follow.
Like me, you probably cringe at the idea of being a snob. But take a look at my Twitter following-followers numbers and you could accuse me of snobbishness: I follow fewer people than follow me.
Why?
Twitter is a time suck
Twitter delights, but it also distracts. I could happily trawl, click and tweet all day long, if it weren’t for a few teeny obligations like my clients’ copywriting projects, this blog, my cooking blog and my family and community responsibilites. Even though I use Tweetdeck to filter and organize tweetstreams, I don’t have the time or mental dexterity to follow thousands of conversations.
So I don’t. And in my haphazard way, I’ve developed guidelines to help me choose which I do follow.
My Twitter Follow Formula
My first rule—and one that informs all others—is no auto-follows. I review follows manually. Unfortunately, it’s time-consuming to check each person’s profile, Tweetstream and blog. Sometimes weeks pass before I can carve out time to look at follows. The selection begins with…
Subtraction
I automatically weed out:
- Adult entertainers and escort pros
- Nudies or people who show cleavage, bare chests or just too much skin. Save it for the beach.
- Bots
- Photos of Freddy Kruger masks. Or swastikas. Or blood-filled goblets.
- Self-proclaimed gurus, evangelists, ninjas or warriors.
- “Passionate” people. You know, people who describe their commitment to digital marketing—or coaching or small business—as “passionate” in their profiles. Here’s UK comic David Mitchell’s take on the current passion for passion.
- @DarkOverlord or @HerSatanicMajesty or anyone else who goes by scary, quasi-demonic monikers.
- People who define themselves by religion in their profiles. With rare exception, I believe in separation of Church and Tweetstream.
- Moms. Don’t jump all over me—I’m a mother of three
beastlywonderful children. But my professional interests lie outside of momism. - Wits who describe themselves as “potty-mouthed.” Yawn.
- Bores who use Twitter as a one-way broadcast system to tweet only about their products, services, discounts, posts, podcasts and Digital Warrior Training Courses.
- Mystery Tweeps who don’t create Twitter profiles.
- Silent types who haven’t tweeted in weeks or months. Or ever. Ever been followed by someone who has never tweeted? I don’t get it.
- Marketers with a gazillion followers—like over 25,000—but of whom I’ve never heard and with whom I feel I have nothing in common.
- Door slammers: People who lock their accounts. Another Twitter oddity: Why follow someone, then make them jump through hoops to follow back?
Addition
After eliminating many follows, I take a few minutes to dig a little deeper to learn more about a person. I tend to follow people who:
- Post full profiles that tell me more about themselves. Since I use Twitter for business I like to know about work and location, but I’m also curious about a person’s interests and avocations.
- Post a photo of themselves.
- Share my interests—pretty wide ranging, including but not limited to copywriting, content marketing, creative writing, journalism, cooking, sustainable farming, design, modern art, theater, personal style, horses, dogs, kids and other animals.
- Tweet smart, interesting, informative, newsworthy, entertaining tweets and links instead of self-aggrandizing crap—see “Bores who use Twitter as a one-way broadcast system,” above.
- Blog or publish original content. Many times, this is my deal breaker: A person’s publishing platform speaks volumes about her professionalism, thought leadership and desire to create community.
Are you a Twitter snob?
Do you follow selectively on Twitter? Why? What’s your criteria for following? Or are you on the other side of the Twitter follow spectrum: Do you believe in following everyone who follows you? Please share how you do it. Dying for details.
great post and I think I am also getting more selective about who I follow as time goes on
Am I a Twitter-Snob? Perhaps. I like to have twice as many followers as the amount I follow. I’m very selective for a lot of the reasons you listed; however, one point of contention is that I use one Twitter account for personal branding. As an entrepreneur with several business interests, I use one account to co-brand all of my efforts (and myself). Some of the Twitter turn-offs you mentioned have worked in my favor! I would generally agree to all of your points, though. Great post!
I think I practice a bit of twitter snoberie. I usually only look for a couple of things though. Here is what I look for when I check out a twitter profile:
1. Have you tweeted in the last week?
2. Have you conversed with someone rather than just blast your blog links to the world. Even better, have you shared other people’s information?
3. Of your last 20 tweets, have you said anything that has caught my attention? If not, chances are I will never even know you are there.
4. Do you have a real name.
Other than that, I am pretty lax. I usually unfollow people who auto DM or spam me with ridiculous chances to win a copy of their free something-or-other or ask me to connect with them on facebook. If I knew you I would love to connect with you on facebook, but alas, I don’t. So there.
Great post and some good alternate ways to narrow the funnel a bit 🙂
What a ripper manifesto, Lorraine. You just wrote full course notes for the definitive Twitter lecture. See you at Harvard. (Or TED!) P. 🙂
@Rebecca: You have so many Twitter followers–yet you’re always engaging and responsive. Share your secrets!
@Deanna: Thanks for taking time to comment. Very interested to know which “Twitter turn-offs” work in your favor!
@Sal: Yes, #3 is very important–I should have included some version of this point in my post. : >
@Paul: Thanks, Paul. Would love to know how you listen in–and respond to- almost 15,000 conversations and always with a thoughtful word or humorous comment. Plus you juggle client work, blogging and a full life offline. I’m in awe.
Not sure if you permit links, Lorraine. Let’s give it a go …
http://www.squidoo.com/twitter-truths
Ah, that worked quite well! 🙂
That piece summarises my Twitter philosophy. Below it is a link to my Kind Clever Cats list (of which you’re a founding member!)
This fluid list contains the 85 souls I’m most interested in tracking at present. I have a dedicated TweetDeck column to this end.
If one of my other 15,000 followers crosses my broader radar by demonstrating outstanding merit, I add them to the list.
I guess it’s a bit like having bifocals. Make sense? P. 🙂
Thank you for your very kind feedback, BTW. I’m delighted to know you feel I’m on the right tram! 🙂
@Ladybirdfi so confessing I don’t get to the Kirk often, generates a ‘No’ follow.Actually, as a Christian I’m happy to declare it but on the downside, my tweets are rarely Christ like. I dinnae suffer fools gladly and I certainly don’t care what folk had for their tea but of course I’d like to think that they had some. I have more followers than I follow, so perhaps I am a snob too, a Christian one obviously.
I agree with all of your points. Apart from the quasi-Demonic monikers who, very often, are absolutely hilarious quite accidentally. Hear, hear, etc.
that’s a really good list- my issue with twitter is that a lot of my friends tweet, and i follow them out of obligation, even though their twitter profile is of no interest to me, for eg. let’s say one friend only tweets about the I-Banking sector- that just doesnt pique my interest. and i am sure they arent interested in my tweets about my grilled tilapia for dinner, either. but it’s rude to not follow them back….i feel i am in a fix.
and then of course among food bloggers, there is an hierarchy, no matter how much you tweet them, they wont follow you back bec they think youre on the lower end of the food blogging food chain. i like to follow not the famous food personalities/bloggers, but those who interact and have some humility. i love @trishdeseine and @anissahelou- famous in the food world, but humble and will tweet with anyone who is pleasant and interesting. x shayma
Oh Lorraine, great post! I too manually review ever follow. You have to. Otherwise, you’re going to be inundated with marketing advice from non-experts selling their software, offers to work for a WHOLE five dollars an article, girls who think you’re looking for a good time, or worse, the one-way tweeter. HATE the one-way tweeter. No RTs, no mentions, no interaction beyond “I’m fabulous and you should be hanging on my every word. And here – since you’ve only seen it once, let me repeat that comment twelve more times…”
And I agree – no religion or politics. Won’t follow anyone who’s got to tout God, Jesus, or their political party.
@FiBird: “…so confessing I don’t get to the Kirk often, generates a ‘No’ follow.” That’s not the sort of benign mention that makes me not follow. I’m talking about ardent–if not fundamentalist–religious declarations that, by their mention, separate the world between us and them. BTW, I bet you a dollar 99% of American English speakers don’t know that “Kirk” means “church.” : >
@Toby: Haha, maybe I should give the demonically-named another chance.
@Shayma: How lovely to”see” you at my office as well as my kitchen! Yes, I know what you mean about feeling bound to follow friends with very divergent interests. Another sticky situation: offline friends with no real interest in Twitter–put whom put up a profile because it’s “the thing,” follow you and NEVER tweet. I just unfollowed a friend who hasn’t tweeted in more than a year. Since her Twitter use is almost non-existent, I doubt she’ll notice–and I know her well enough to explain. But still. Awkward. Regarding culinary luminaries: I’m with you. I follow foodies who are interesting and who like to connect. I can visit the recipe rock stars anonymously at their blogs. XO, L.
@Lori: Spot on: One-way tweeters are a HUGE bore. Amazingly, for all the social-media-is-a-conversation-you- must-provide-useful-community-building-content, Twitter still abounds with one-way conversationalists. Another puzzlement–and “bot” tip-off: The one-way broadcasters with ginormous followings who only show a handful of tweets. I just checked out a follow that had 13,000+ followers and only around 300 tweets. Anyone else smell algorithmic gaming?