Bill Gates just showed up on a list of suspected undesirables, in the company of con artists, Civil War veterans and, well, some of my dearest friends. The list was delivered courtesy of The Twit Cleaner, a free service created by Aussie Si Dawson to remove annoying people from your Twitter stream. While it’s easy to discount the report for its number of apparent false positives, the categories alone are useful as a sort of inverse best practices list—a manual for how to get yourself unfollowed on Twitter. And on closer inspection, you might find that some of the obvious false positives are not so obvious after all.
Reports begin with a list of accounts exhibiting “Dodgy Behavior,” including that most insidious of abuses, “Try to Sell You Crap.” But other behaviors in the Dodgy category, such as inclusion of links with every post, are actually considered by some people to be good behavior. Consultants trying to help marketers establish their brand on Twitter often recommend including a link with every post so that click-throughs can be measured for ROI. They forget to see the Twitter stream from a reader’s perspective, in which the conversation is both motivation and destination. A stream of endless links is not just an annoyance, it’s a conversation killer. And if every post within a community is designed to take participants outside of that community, it begins to look a lot more like advertising than peer-to-peer communication.
The next offenders in the report are all guilty of sloth. Of not tweeting in at least the past 30 days. This is the group most despised by the Twitter Doubters who point to inactive accounts as proof that Twitter is a passing fad, and who complain that the numbers most often cited for success are bloated and inaccurate. But it is here, in this list, that you’ll find your timid friends. They are good people at best, and at worst they are far less annoying than people who tweet Bartlett’s quotations every 30 minutes. It is also here that some of tomorrow’s best conversationalists are getting ready to shine. Sometimes an account that has been inactive for months will suddenly blossom into a busy, insightful stream of great information. When the time is right. So these offenders, more than the others flushed out by The Twit Cleaner, deserve a second chance. Interestingly enough, some of the people I’ve found on this list are “social media experts” who are advising teams across major corporations about how to use Twitter. No need to name names. They deserve a second chance too.
The last major category is dedicated to people who don’t seem to interact with others in the community. It is here, not surprisingly, that you will find the big celebrities. People who are either so famous or so smart that they can’t possibly be expected to follow you or respond to your questions. You’ll also find experimental accounts that are expanding the horizons of Twitter as a medium and by definition will be breaking the rules of good social media behavior. Accounts like @Genny_Spencer which publish real day-by-day accounts of life in Kansas between 1937 and 1941. Or TwHistory‘s re-creation of the Battle of Gettysburg through journal entries from its participants. These experimental accounts are worth following because they show us new possibilities and enrich the medium.
Celebrities, on the other hand, may be less deserving. It makes sense to keep up with people who you are truly interested in, but when it comes to the visionaries, rest assured that their most valuable insights will be retweeted to death within minutes. Better to follow your friends, and those experts who are not afraid to engage in conversation with ordinary people. The big names, whether they are major brand accounts posting endless links to the same corporate website, or major celebrities who only respond to other celebrities, these big names should remain suspects on the list of Twitter abusers.



