One the mysteries of twitter is the accumulation of followers. Everyone seems to want them, more of them, always more, as if there is a prize at the end of the day. I assume it’s some validation of self-worth, for people who don’t get out much, unless one’s purpose is to get information out to as many people as possible, a la Alltop impresario @GuyKawasaki. But is the effort to collect followers real or a house of cards?
From the Riverfront Times, the test came in St. Louis:
From the Riverfront Times, the test came in St. Louis:
A few weeks ago a local Twitter user, Rex Gradeless (Rex7) and non-local Twitterer Brandon Prebynski (Prebynski) of Indianapolis began promoting what they billed as the “St. Louis Largest Tweet-up Ever!” which was to happen last Friday at McGurk’s in Soulard. Well, by all accounts it wasn’t. I wasn’t able to attend myself but, Todd Jordan (Tojosan if you’re nasty) did, and he reported that there were about 19 people in attendance.
Having 19 people come to your party doesn’t sound so terrible at first blush, but consider how many were invited.
Rex Gradeless is a law student who has joined the ranks of social media advocates, much like my young buddy Adrian Dayton, who has accumulated more than 22,000 followers. Both have impressive numbers, to be sure, if the numbers mean anything at all. But as the St. Louis tweet-up (don’t blame me, I don’t create silly twitter words) demonstrates, it’s a meaningless bit of self-deception promoted unceasingly by the twitter sycophants. How many of those followers have the slightest desire to meet their hero? How many of those followers would have followed our heroes if they didn’t follow them back? How many of those followers are busy trying to sell something to the same folks who are trying to sell them something in return?
What eludes me in all this is the compulsive need to accumulate followers. I guess this is the twitter equivalent of friends on Facebook, another subject of little interest to me. This isn’t to suggest, as the acolytes no doubt will, that I’m a twitter hater (or a Facebook hater, for that matter), but that I reject the notion that the accumulation of followers means anything whatsoever. Give me 10 followers with whom I actually want to interact and I’ll trade you 10,000 spammers.
And contrary to the contention of the inchoate twitter marketing guru wannabes, these huge numbers do not increase your odds of getting a date for Saturday night, unless you want to dress up like Ned Beatty and squeal like a pig. If you want to know whether you’re loved and admired by your followers, just ask Rex7.
I’ve been called a dinosaur and curmudgeon for throwing wet blankets on the youth of the law and their efforts to reinvent the wheel. Chatting with Turkewitz last night, who was getting a kick out of my provocative posts about the Slackoisie, particularly a second year law student’s “response” to my latest challenge to the failed work/life crowd, we commiserated at all the energy of these “go-getters” misdirected from worthy causes into such nonsensical endeavors as demanding their right to be slackers (all the while insisting they aren’t, by their own definition) and collecting twitter followers. Turk observed, “it’s like trying to explain chocolate to someone who’s never tasted it.” They’re young and full of life, and can’t possibly comprehend that there’s anything more to understand than what’s in front of their face at the moment.
I don’t blame the Rex7s and Prebynskis of the world for trying to rack up more followers than anyone else. It’s a hobby, like collecting rubber bands. But there’s no prize at the end of the game. They would do better to spend their time getting a taste of chocolate. Then they would understand.
H/T Venkat
The turnout was especially disappointing since both Gradeless and Prebynski have thousands and thousands of followers on Twitter. Gradeless has over 60,000 followers all by himself. You would think that a twitterer that influential should be able to attract more than 19 people to a tweetup right? What could have possibly have gone wrong?The problem appears to be the nature of one’s followers. Accumulation of numbers doesn’t speak to the “quality” of followers, meaning people who one would actually care about. It’s easy to get numbers, given how many people are spammers looking to build up their own numbers by following everyone in sight in the hope that they will follow in return. But these aren’t your friends. They don’t love you. They don’t care about you. They don’t even know who you are. If someone following you couldn’t care less what you have to twit, then what good are they as a follower?
Rex Gradeless is a law student who has joined the ranks of social media advocates, much like my young buddy Adrian Dayton, who has accumulated more than 22,000 followers. Both have impressive numbers, to be sure, if the numbers mean anything at all. But as the St. Louis tweet-up (don’t blame me, I don’t create silly twitter words) demonstrates, it’s a meaningless bit of self-deception promoted unceasingly by the twitter sycophants. How many of those followers have the slightest desire to meet their hero? How many of those followers would have followed our heroes if they didn’t follow them back? How many of those followers are busy trying to sell something to the same folks who are trying to sell them something in return?
What eludes me in all this is the compulsive need to accumulate followers. I guess this is the twitter equivalent of friends on Facebook, another subject of little interest to me. This isn’t to suggest, as the acolytes no doubt will, that I’m a twitter hater (or a Facebook hater, for that matter), but that I reject the notion that the accumulation of followers means anything whatsoever. Give me 10 followers with whom I actually want to interact and I’ll trade you 10,000 spammers.
And contrary to the contention of the inchoate twitter marketing guru wannabes, these huge numbers do not increase your odds of getting a date for Saturday night, unless you want to dress up like Ned Beatty and squeal like a pig. If you want to know whether you’re loved and admired by your followers, just ask Rex7.
I’ve been called a dinosaur and curmudgeon for throwing wet blankets on the youth of the law and their efforts to reinvent the wheel. Chatting with Turkewitz last night, who was getting a kick out of my provocative posts about the Slackoisie, particularly a second year law student’s “response” to my latest challenge to the failed work/life crowd, we commiserated at all the energy of these “go-getters” misdirected from worthy causes into such nonsensical endeavors as demanding their right to be slackers (all the while insisting they aren’t, by their own definition) and collecting twitter followers. Turk observed, “it’s like trying to explain chocolate to someone who’s never tasted it.” They’re young and full of life, and can’t possibly comprehend that there’s anything more to understand than what’s in front of their face at the moment.
I don’t blame the Rex7s and Prebynskis of the world for trying to rack up more followers than anyone else. It’s a hobby, like collecting rubber bands. But there’s no prize at the end of the game. They would do better to spend their time getting a taste of chocolate. Then they would understand.
H/T Venkat
Tweetups are pretty fun in my experience. If you ever receive an invite (I realize the likelihood is low) you should consider checking it out 🙂
Funny you should say that. I just received a tweetup invitation from @quickcashforyourchildren and @growalargeronetoday and was trying to decide whether to go.
Excellent… pick of my day.
I do hope that you will be able to attend a party I am holding with our very own blogospheric Geeklawyer… for surmudgeons, piss artists, lawyers, and bon viveurs we are calling it a Twrinking session to talk about our Twanking… on Twitter… naturally.
You may think I cannot spell curmudgeon … but us Surmudgeons… have a certain nobility! Or should that be Sir Mudgeon?
Give me 19 followers with whom I actually want to interact with and I’ll trade you 20,000 spammers.
Scott, as you’d be the first to point out, it’s not the number of followers that makes a meetup or tweetup a success, but the quality of the people who show up at such events. Such an event with 19 interesting people could be quite a success. Those would not likely include your followers @quickcashforyourchildren or @growalargeronetoday who aren’t really be interested in meeting you or me personally — not that we don’t need their help.
By the way … I haven’t had a reply to my invitation from my @growalargeronetoday tweet… are you coming? Would be good…. We can talk about the rising economy…
Funny thing is, my first reaction to the 19 who showed was, “that’s pretty good.” Had the circumstances been a bit different, and had it not been promoted as the “largest tweetup ever” with two guys who had tens of thousand of followers, it would never have been deemed a failure. If it was you or me, it would have been a lovely time.
I thought nothing of the sort, M’lud.