<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Scripting News - Latest Comments in What a first-time Twitter user sees (Scripting News)</title><link>http://scripting.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://scripting.disqus.com/what_a_first_time_twitter_user_sees_scripting_news/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 May 2009 05:50:10 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: What a first-time Twitter user sees (Scripting News)</title><link>http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/05/01/whatAFirsttimeTwitterUserS.html#comment-9007878</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I got this *without* explicitly signing up to their suggestions (or they were pre-checked or something) when I created a new account a couple of weeks ago.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's dire.  Sad, sad, sad.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">interstar</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2009 05:50:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What a first-time Twitter user sees (Scripting News)</title><link>http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/05/01/whatAFirsttimeTwitterUserS.html#comment-8979662</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I agree about the problem with follow x users and the problem with following celebs.  Likely to get several accounts that are either spammers or not engaged.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps better would be to recommend folks that have good follow/follower balance, a certain ration of straight posts to @ posts and below a certain ratio of link sharing.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tojosan</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 08:25:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What a first-time Twitter user sees (Scripting News)</title><link>http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/05/01/whatAFirsttimeTwitterUserS.html#comment-8909704</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You're probably right -- it's best not to jump to conclusions.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dave</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 18:29:23 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What a first-time Twitter user sees (Scripting News)</title><link>http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/05/01/whatAFirsttimeTwitterUserS.html#comment-8909582</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Dave, looking more at @AdventureGirl, I wonder - is she really a spam bot or just a person that we look at and consider toxic?  I'm not actually seeing much in the way of affiliate links there.  I mean, her profile page looks like a train wreck to me - but so does most of cable TV and lots of people like that.  Maybe I haven't looked close enough though and she really is a robotic spam bot and not just a vapid spam bot.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Marshall Kirkpatrick</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 18:22:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What a first-time Twitter user sees (Scripting News)</title><link>http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/05/01/whatAFirsttimeTwitterUserS.html#comment-8908927</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I don't get it: @adventuregirl, which is clearly a spam account, is a "suggested user" now?  the other ones are well-known celebrities or media figures, but based on your first screenshot, they're not actively engaged, at least not as much as "adventuregirl." ...what a shame.  That said, I can't remember what I saw when I first logged on, back in May 2007.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">.LAG</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 17:49:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What a first-time Twitter user sees (Scripting News)</title><link>http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/05/01/whatAFirsttimeTwitterUserS.html#comment-8906458</link><description>&lt;p&gt;In essence it illustrates the main problem with any "follow x users" approach. No matter which x users you choose, some users are going to be much more active than other users. Pity the poor person who got excited about seeing Mandy Moore and Ashley Tisdale tweets - they're drowned out by all the other stuff in the feed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Of course, things are subject to change depending upon the time you look at the feed. If you check on Saturday, at least all the #followfriday stuff wouldn't be there. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">John E. Bredehoft (Empoprises)</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 16:16:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What a first-time Twitter user sees (Scripting News)</title><link>http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/05/01/whatAFirsttimeTwitterUserS.html#comment-8906221</link><description>&lt;p&gt;No wonder people don't get Twitter.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Rex Hammock</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 16:08:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What a first-time Twitter user sees (Scripting News)</title><link>http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/05/01/whatAFirsttimeTwitterUserS.html#comment-8905560</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Reminds me of Cable television. It looks like a 140 character version of cable tv. Lots of channels to surf but nothing worth watching (with the exception of @google tweet maybe)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">atul</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 15:53:30 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>