Both @LouiseTriance and I tried this today, and apparently we’re clean, but a whole load of follows we have are hollow and pointless. It’s probably a good thing, because I just couldn’t read tweets from so many other people.
I’m also interested in the ratio of follows to following, where for example many celebs have thousands of the former and almost none of the latter. Clearly they will have thousands of fans because they are well known, but I’m surprised at those who personally follow fewer than 100 others. Surely if they were truly engaging with Twitter, they would want to read other’s tweets. I know that most people with thousands of followers will maintain a watch by simply checking a feed of anyone “mentioning” their twitter name, otherwise they’d never see any messages addressed to themselves.
Now I personally am aware that in our own little corner of commerce, I am fairly well known (due to the NORAs mostly), so anyone following me will be getting several messages per day. These will be a mixture of business and personal, serious and jokey. However, I suspect only a very few are actually reading them.
I am also very interested in applying some of the rules of SEO to Twitter accounts. For example, if I have many more links in (followers) than links out (following), does that constitute good SEO? Am I leaking Twitter SEO (like Google’s pagerank) each time I follow someone else? If @DuncanBannatyne followed me (105,500 followers), is that much more valuable than say @MattAlder with a relatively puny 2,803 followers.
Recently @DuncanBannatyne sparked a viral campaign by suggesting that all his followers should follow each other, and would eventually have 100,000 followers like him. The hashtag #duncansdream inspired thousands do just that, with one notable exception – Duncan himself, who follows a mere 150 other accounts. Not really playing the game is he?
Can someone give me some definitive answers on this please?