What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
86 Comments
- Skooj, on 08/11/2008, -2/+132to be entirely honest, I am not sure why you would follow 2,000+ people anyway. That's way too much content to sift through at any given time, and would make reading crap from the people you actually care about near impossible. You can get nearly the same effect through the public time line (though I guess if you want to sift out the Japanese or whatever that might be a problem). Good for twitter for making this change, hopefully it'll help cut down the spam emails I get about porn sites following me.
- cubby, on 08/11/2008, -1/+71Poor Scoble
- CapeNadir, on 08/11/2008, -1/+43Let's twitter about this!
- kingjafee, on 08/12/2008, -2/+36Damn you Twitter now what I am going to do with these 1500 extra monitors I bought to keep track of each person that I follow individually!!!
Who are you to tell me that I can follow the every moves of only 2000 people Twitter!!! - MellerTime, on 08/11/2008, -0/+25Now will they run back through and review all the existing spam profiles that are following 40,000 people?
- JudgeMonkey, on 08/12/2008, -0/+21Hmm, sounds interesting. What's the website to sign up?
- futoranime, on 08/12/2008, -1/+17$20 that TWIT will talk 10 minutes about this.
- MackenzieArbour, on 08/12/2008, -0/+16They're not limiting the number of people who can follow you, they're limiting the number of people you can follow.
- porkbarbeque, on 08/11/2008, -2/+17It's bullsh** that Brent, not Twitter, is reporting this information.
- Bukowsky, on 08/12/2008, -1/+15I'm following about 150 or so people, and THAT'S already alot of noise. I couldn't imagine attempting to follow 2,000 people!
- tapeworm77, on 08/12/2008, -0/+13Hey you can always turn their cell phone signals into sonar images and follow them that way on your 1500 monitors.
- Burento, on 08/12/2008, -3/+11pownce
- FTLJohnson, on 08/12/2008, -0/+8Why would celebrities follow a bunch of people? Celebrities are followed, not followers. I don't think even an average person has the time to follow the twitterings of 2000 people, let alone a busy celebrity...
- Ductapemaster, on 08/12/2008, -0/+7http://www.getafirstlife.com/
- invader, on 08/12/2008, -0/+7His account is set up to auto-follow people who follow him.. He's following more people than are following him because people drop him from time to time.
- AussieCynic, on 08/11/2008, -1/+8stumbles only allows 200.....
- NewsFeed, on 08/12/2008, -4/+11plurk
- Burento, on 08/11/2008, -1/+8Actually you would be amazed how many people don't update that often. Only about 10% of all you follow will probably post regularly.
- FuzzyCat, on 08/12/2008, -0/+7
2000 is still to high. 500 is a much better figure. There's no reason to follow even that many people on Twitter. Lets face for each of those people they're going to have to transmit (im/web/sms) a message... no wonder it's falling apart. - invader, on 08/12/2008, -0/+6What is a Jaiku? Is it some sort of poem?
- Burento, on 08/11/2008, -1/+7At least someone is.. Twitter never really does a good job communicating change..
- adpowers, on 08/12/2008, -0/+5But if you look, Barack is following over 58,000 people:
http://twitter.com/BarackObama
He's following more people than follow him. - DigitAl56K, on 08/12/2008, -0/+5Good! Hopefully this will get rid of some fail whale/scalability problems.
Can you imagine the strain on their servers when they have to manage updates across people following 37,000 others in their databases? - omgsoemo, on 08/12/2008, -0/+4identi.ca is terrible
- rgsteele, on 08/12/2008, -2/+6identi.ca
- Fleagleman, on 08/12/2008, -0/+4Who the hell would even want to follow 2,000 people?
- himerus, on 08/14/2008, -0/+4To all the people who are complaining about not being able to follow more than 2000 people on twitter: You are retarded, and
A.) You don’t know, have never known, nor will you ever know personally 2000 people.
B.) If you actually have time to follow 2000 “friends” on twitter or ANY website for that matter, you should introduce yourself to the outdoors, or at least to a more productive day of work, and talk to someone about the twitter problem you have, that has turned you into a twit. - iNunchuk, on 08/12/2008, -6/+9Whats a good alternative to Twitter?
- omgsoemo, on 08/12/2008, -2/+5identi.ca is terrible
just ***** use Ping.fm and post to em all - NewsFeed, on 08/11/2008, -1/+4Um.. they removed that.. http://blog.stumbleupon.com/friends_fans_changes
- cliffr39, on 08/12/2008, -0/+3"It's bullsh** that" any idiot would want to follow more than 2,000 people. Do these Twits not have a life?
- criztoph, on 08/12/2008, -0/+3totally agreed... there certainly is a threshold to how many "active" followers you can have while getting the value from the service...
- mynameistux, on 08/12/2008, -2/+5buried for wasting that few moments of my life.
- inactive, on 08/12/2008, -1/+4+1 for getting a real life
- 33PercentGod, on 08/12/2008, -0/+3Following 2000 people = Look how awesome I am by my friend count.
You're lying to yourself if you think otherwise. - JudgeMonkey, on 08/12/2008, -0/+3Very true. For a moment I thought they were limiting the people that could follow you, which would be bad. However, porkbarbeque was just saying that twitter needs to announce these things themselves, and just be a bit more open about changes.
- idastheman, on 08/12/2008, -0/+3Twitter talk on TWiT has died down lately. Thank god.
- tylermenezes, on 08/12/2008, -3/+5No, you are wrong. This story was originally "broken" by another blog, to which @ev responded. However, this copycat didn't read the comments. It STARTS at 2,000. It's based on a number of factors, not the least of which the number of people following you and whether someone from Twitter knows you're not up to no good.
- jayadelson, on 08/30/2008, -0/+2Why would anyone care about what more than 2k people are doing at any given point? It's just noise. The reason to follow that many is only to spam them with the initial follow request, hoping for mutuality.
- ZeroCool07, on 08/12/2008, -2/+4Who the ***** wants to follow that many people anyway? - I think if you follow more than 100-200 then you need a social life.
- mrmayor92, on 08/12/2008, -6/+8i dont understand.... whats good about twitter again?
- Bukowsky, on 08/12/2008, -1/+3FINALLY!
- asurroca, on 08/12/2008, -0/+2That's the number of people you're allowed to follow, not the amount of followers you're allowed to have. As long as he can have 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 people following him, he can continue to bring Twitter to its knees....
- elfprince13, on 08/12/2008, -0/+1" 2,000 followers"
it should be followees. which probably isn't a word, due to the normal antonym being "leaders" - Hoofd, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1So much for following all Dutch Twitter users... Well. I can live without that.
- sethrubenstein, on 08/12/2008, -0/+1Oh No, seriously though I can see how for the likes of Rose and Scoble this can be a problem but for you and me the Joe Schmos of Web2.0 we'll get what maybe 200 followers and a good number of those are spam.
- ironiridis, on 08/12/2008, -0/+1No, it's "follows". It's limiting the 2k people you are following. Each of them are one of your "follows".
- OmegaWolf, on 08/12/2008, -0/+1What Twitter ought to do is have a user reputation system. If a person gets a bad reputation from fellow Twitterers, then they face a limit on how many people they can follow for a given time. After they've had some time to "think about what they did", they can be allowed full access again.
-
Show 51 - 91 of 91 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is