Forums

[Raymond Fong Company: Numis Network Contribution Level: 3]

Geeze, talk about a major Twitter poop (See Carl? I am keeping it PG) storm.

After Mike's email circulated several days ago, it seems like everybody is grabbing their pitch-forks, torches, and whatever other farming/crucifying devices they can get their hands on striking back at Mike (virtually).

Apparently some folks don't like Mike's "UNfollowing" thousands of followers he has on Twitter. And some have spoken out of course. Now, I have to say... folks have been quite cordial in their disagreement, so much that it probably disgusts Carl just seeing how "nice" we are all being.

Well, for the record, I side with Mike.

I think if you get over his main message and really dig into what he's saying, you'll get that he's not doing it to be rude. He's doing it out of being authentic and genuine. In other words, he's not interested in "let's see who has the most # of followers" popularity contest.

Given how much Twitter has become more and more of a "shout box", I can only begin to imagine what following thousands of Twitters is like. And I BET that if you are following thousands of active Twitters at a time, you are using software like TweetDeck to create a list of only those whom you genuinely care about...

This becomes your "friend's list" (or whatever and however many other lists you have). So then, why the heck are you following the other folks?

Oh I am sorry... it's "out of courtesy". You follow folks just because they followed you, never mind that they followed you in the first place for selfish reasons - with the hope you'd follow back therefore making them THINK they are building a bigger list and seem more popular.

And this is why Twitter is getting diluted. This is why people are starting to take Twitter less and less seriously. And worse yet... this is also why your Tweets are losing more and more power.

So I say again, stop the vanity. You should only be concerned with those who follow you for the sake of who you are and the messages you bring NOT whether you follow back or not. By the same token, you should only follow those you WANT to follow, regardless of whether he/she follows back or not.

Raymond Fong
P.S. I like Yanik Silver's method of deciding whom he should consider following (I picked this up from Tim Erway). He considers following those who @ him with a personal message. I dig that and will start using that

P.P.S. My Twitter (but I won't promise you I'll follow you back... just sayin'!) http://www.twitter.com/raymondfong

[Ferny Ceballos Company: Numis Network Contribution Level: 4]

Yeah, I've been using Yanik's method this whole time... mainly because who the hell has the time to follow everyone that follows you???

I mean if you're hiring someone to manage your Twitter account (reciprocal following) then you're not really participating in social media to begin with.

I'm with Mike on this as well... and it's not cause he's my friend. I've never chosen to do reciprocal following for the same reason Mike is now coming back to the light.

The message you should be conveying to your followers is "these are the people whom are important enough for me to follow. These are the people I think you should be paying attention to".

That may sound snotty, but if you dilute your "following" list with random people, then you've done a disservice to your followers, because now they don't know who they should be paying attention to.

-Ferny

[Cynthia Acoff Contribution Level: 4]

Great Post. I read some not-so-nice comments about Mike today. I agree with you and Mike. I don't see the need to follow a bunch of people that offer me a lot of free stuff that I never look into anyway. I clean up my followers regularly.

[Jim Yaghi Contribution Level: 4]

I agree with mike on the grounds that social media is how you choose to be social. This is the kind of person he is, so deal with it.

Also, i think that it's getting a little silly this whole "i have 52,000 followers i have all the twitter secrets!" Bull. There are no twitter secrets here. We all know how they're building that list. Just doing reciprocal follows with automated software. And what's worse is that most of those people claiming that aren't even revealing that's how they're doing it.

I call that CHEATING.

I am far more impressed with someone who has 10,000 followers and only follows 100. I would want to know his or her secrets.

However, with that all being said...i still have an argument for the other side. Automated software aside, let's talk about the use of software like Tweetdeck to create groups of your "real friends".

Sometimes my "real friends" have nothing interesting to say that i want to comment about. Sorry guys...i like having you in my "real friends" group, but often i can't comment about the movie you just saw because i haven't seen it or even heard of it.

What i do now, especially if i'm bored, and i've already tweeted about what's on my mind, and no one's responding...if i want company...i go look in my "all" group and try to find someone to meet with a @ reply.

Unfortunately, this is where i see the biggest problem. These people have nothing to say that i care about either--i mean it's all just quotes and "oh i just updated my blog http;//insertlinkhere.com". i often don't want to leave the twitter page--not for your blog post or your shared video. my connection tends to be slow and i rather not wait.

So the real issue is...it's not about how many people you follow or whether or not you use automated tools or how many follow you...but more about adding value.

And believe it or not, being entertaining, fun, and friendly, that's valuable. Especially for someone who wants a breather between editing an html page, tweaking an adwords ad, or watching a movie on their pc.

Who uses twitter to be INTERESTING?

That's who i care to meet. Not the guy with the most followers or the big bullshit auto list builder software.

laterz
jim

[Ferny Ceballos Company: Numis Network Contribution Level: 4]

I just posted this as a comment on one of the articles, but I wanted to share it:

Ok, I think people are using this opportunity to score some "controversy" points by going against what a top leader is saying and others geniunely disagree.

Either way, I want to ask a tough question: Who the hell do you think you are???

(I told you it would be tough)

Honestly. Answer the question! Because as far as I'm concerned, a year and a half ago when I got on Mike Dillard's radar and he took an appreciation for what Ray and I were accomplishing, I was truly humbled and grateful for his attention.

Today he's a really good friend and business partner, but I don't take that friendship for granted, because I had to work so hard for it. It's an honor to be taken seriously by Mike and other leaders like Jay Kubassek, Charles Heflin, Tim Erway, Mike Klingler, Ann Sieg, and many others.

The fact that they would point to me as someone they would recommend for a job or on a topic of expertise is F#$%@$# AWESOME!

So the fact that Mike's following list will now reflect who he would recommend that you learn and follow, is far more valuable to you than getting a "follow back" from Mike.

But I think this is also reflective of where Mike sees himself. He's not depending on meeting and connecting with a few dozen people like the average networker. He's beyond that point in his career.

However, you may still need to do that and connect with as many people as you can. That's ok too. But you need to recognize where you are at in your business and accept it.

Mike's role is to give you direction and his following list is a part of that. Your role is to connect with as many folks as you can and add value to them. Your follow list should reflect that as well.

So if you are not on Mike's follow list, it just means you still got some work to do.

-Ferny

P.S. If this offends you, please unfollow me, un-friend me and cease from acknowledging my existence.

[Eric Walker Company: SendOutCards Contribution Level: 4]

Good conversation.

I don't think there is much to make a fuss about either way. I do think it's a matter of personal preference, and as long as you're thinking independently, and have a reason for your actions (on Twitter) that's what matters most.

For Twitter especially, I think it's important to be crystal clear on why you're using it; how you're using it; and what your main goal is...business or pleasure?...playing the surface game or only following those who are genuine friends, associates or business relationships?

I was pleased to read Mike Dillard's email awhile back (his newsletters are THE BEST), and glad that he took a stand. I think for many people, he said what has been on many other peoples' minds. I agree with him. I agree that it's impressive to see someone who has 10,000 followers and follows 100. Take Tim Ferriss for example.

Similarly, I study the way Mike Klingler uses Twitter (follows 46K; has 42K followers) and it's powerful and effective. He's a brand. He has the microphone and his own stage. It's clear that he has a clear idea what he's using it for. His Tweet message is consistent and value-packed.

At the end of the day, as with everything, it comes down to being effective at implementing your intentions.

[Carolina Millan Contribution Level: 2]

Hmmm. I don't know.

I only know about one or two people who use Twitter only to connect with people they already know.

I think there's more vanity in only caring about the people who want to listen to what YOU have to say, and dismiss all the rest. How about giving those people a chance too? How do you know that those people you decided to follow out of "politeness" as you guys call it, end up becoming big friends or big business partners? What if they didn't add you just because you're famous and would follow you back, but because they saw value in you? What if they also are worht being listened to, even if they're not as cool as others?

I don't know. That's why I don't have lists, or use Tweetdeck. I like to believe that every person I'm following will add up to my twitter experience one way or the other. I'm happy to say that since I'm not famous or anything, a lot of my followers decided to follow me because they thought I could add some value, or be nice or whatever, and not because of my name or anything. And of course another few thought I'd follow back, which I often do. But as I said on another thread, I follow those people and then head out to DM them. I admit that I don't DM all of them because hey, that's a lot of people and it takes time, but I try my best.

My two cents. We should all agree to disagree on this one, because there is no manual out there that owns the truth about how to use Twitter. Use it however you feel like and don't tell others what they should do, just because you think your way is the best. Nobody's right, nobody's wrong, it's just a different approach. Do what works better for you.

cheers,

Caro.

[Raymond Fong Company: Numis Network Contribution Level: 3]

Use it however you feel like and don't tell others what they should do, just because you think your way is the best. Nobody's right, nobody's wrong, it's just a different approach. Do what works better for you.

Actually Caro (and this is going on a tangent), there is a backlash that affects everybody if the abuse keeps happening. Fernando Ceballos, David Gonzalez, and myself was on a call with Dave Evans (social media expert) early today and he was describing a major point that was raised at South by Southwest (a social media event).

In a nutshell, lots of folks are abusing social media for the sake of spamming everybody so much that they are ruining the experience and the platform for other folks. As such, one recourse that's being considered is banning businesses from using social media platforms (whatever choose to participate) to promote their businesses.

Now, you may have a business and you may use it in a fair manner (add value, play nice, interact, etc.) and you may cry foul. You may say, "Hey, that's not fair!"

And you know what, you would be right! But for the sake of protecting those with other motives (or no motives), i.e. those who are not using it for business, such generalization is one way to deal with this problem.

So with that in mind, going back to what you said, in that perspective, I'd have to say some are right, some are wrong... And I'll be damned if those who are doing it "wrong" (as in, getting business promotion taken off of the social media airwaves) will ruin this nice outlet for me.

With that said... bear in mind that this IS on a tangent so it may not directly apply to the main topic at hand (the whole reciprocal following may or may not constitute what's right or wrong).

Raymond

[Paul Schmitz Company: Empower Network, LLC Contribution Level: 2]

Here's the way I see it:

Mike UNFollowed me

BIG DEAL!! He obviously knows what he's doing.

The guy's a pioneer in the industry and worth a LITTLE BIT MORE than most of the people complaining

(Look at a successful man, with ripe fruits, and duplicate them.)

I actually started to look into who I follow a little closer.

For instance, the 146 Jerrys, all with a name like 1wK5Rt will NOT be followed

I ALSO side with Mike

[Josh Thomas Contribution Level: 3]

It seems to me that PPC and SEO is the wrong place to be discussing this particular topic.

Perhaps we can move this to the lounge?

Anyway...

Mike made an adjustment, an improvement from his perspective.
Twitter is still a new concept and there are MANY bugs to be worked
out, many best practices to be developed. Mike saw that his marketing
strategy on Twitter was not headed in the right direction and changed it.
Right or wrong, responding to an issue of growing concern is good
business.

As Dave Evans describes in his book, the early days of TV advertising
were horribly untargeted interruptions of programming. The early
days of email were smattered with SPAM. The early days of Myspace
were stocked to the brim with unsavory marketers, sex offenders,
porn site promoters and the like.

Today, all three of those mediums are MUCH more pleasant than
they once were.

As with all other forms of communication, Twitter must go through its
growing pains. Things will even out in the long haul, and I suspect that
more folks will gravitate toward Mike's line of thinking, once they get
tired of the shouting match.

For instance...
I got on Twitter and started using a lot of the tools that
Curt Frieden, Jonathan Budd et al recommended. These were all
automated scripts, programs, etc. that were designed to maximize
my exposure and minimize my efforts. I worked diligently and got
about 300-400 followers in a week or so.

Thought I was cool.

Problem was, when I tried communicating with those folks, I pretty
much got ignored. And I'm talking about valuable posts, conversation
starters, @replies....generally humanoid type material.

No one listened.

The problem was further exacerbated (check that one, Gaz) by the
catastrophe that was TweetLater. Before I used Jesse Stay's Auto-DM
blocker, I was inundated with about 30-40 non-sensical thank yous
per day.

Does this look familiar?
Hey, thanks for the follow. Check out my spammy opportunity at http://tr.im/sPam

I was a culprit, too...before I realized that not only were these messages
NOT getting read or links clicked (I actually tried promoting Better Networker),
but I wasn't even reading them MYSELF. They're stupid. Seriously,
they are a waste of bandwidth. Eventually, this will be dealt with,
but for now, we must OPT to do the right thing and improve the Twitter
experience.

Jesse Stay (the creator of Social Too) bucked the trend by no longer offering
an Auto-DM service. I thought he was crazy at first, but I eventually jumped
on his bandwagon because it made sense and drastically improved my Twitter
experience.

Mike is making sense. He is making a move toward the betterment of this
particular social network. And it WILL get better, whether we want it to or not.

That's the power of Social Media. It is a community that is ultimately controlled
by its users and they will establish the greater good. Mike is just doing
it now before Twitter becomes nothing more than a smattering of garbled
mess, tweeting itself into oblivion and out of the realm of usefulness.