<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Twitter Bots Are Effective</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective</link>
	<description>Ryan Jones Blogs About Internet Culture, Marketing, SEO, &#38; Social Media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 00:30:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3728</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:34:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3728</guid>
		<description>Insanely tempting to click on that link. I&#039;ve resisted... so far.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Insanely tempting to click on that link. I&#8217;ve resisted&#8230; so far.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3726</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:12:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3726</guid>
		<description>When have you not known me to engage in my fair share of black-hat and sinister activity?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When have you not known me to engage in my fair share of black-hat and sinister activity?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexander</title>
		<link>http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3725</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexander</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:38:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3725</guid>
		<description>&quot;it makes a case to how having thousands of followers can translate into money if I’m sending them to a page with ads on it. &quot;

Do you realise how sinister that sounds?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;it makes a case to how having thousands of followers can translate into money if I’m sending them to a page with ads on it. &#8221;</p>
<p>Do you realise how sinister that sounds?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3724</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:34:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3724</guid>
		<description>I agree that twitter isn&#039;t really a conversation. I think friendfeed is doing a good job of allowing impromptu conversations.

Here&#039;s an update to my link experiment. Out of 163 followers, 79 clicked the link that said &quot;testing to see how many will blindly click this: &quot;

That&#039;s pretty good - and it makes a case to how having thousands of followers can translate into money if I&#039;m sending them to a page with ads on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that twitter isn&#8217;t really a conversation. I think friendfeed is doing a good job of allowing impromptu conversations.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s an update to my link experiment. Out of 163 followers, 79 clicked the link that said &#8220;testing to see how many will blindly click this: &#8221;</p>
<p>That&#8217;s pretty good &#8211; and it makes a case to how having thousands of followers can translate into money if I&#8217;m sending them to a page with ads on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Doucette</title>
		<link>http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3723</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Doucette</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:17:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3723</guid>
		<description>Thanks for writing this up Ryan, lots of good points!

The thing about Twitter is that &quot;following&quot; doesn&#039;t necessarily mean &quot;reading what these people say&quot; - there seem to be three types of users, those who post to their followers, those who read what the people they&#039;re following tweet, and then those who engage in two-way discussions.  I think they&#039;re room for all of these people, but new users especially need to realize that there are a lot of reasons why someone might choose to follow you, and respond accordingly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for writing this up Ryan, lots of good points!</p>
<p>The thing about Twitter is that &#8220;following&#8221; doesn&#8217;t necessarily mean &#8220;reading what these people say&#8221; &#8211; there seem to be three types of users, those who post to their followers, those who read what the people they&#8217;re following tweet, and then those who engage in two-way discussions.  I think they&#8217;re room for all of these people, but new users especially need to realize that there are a lot of reasons why someone might choose to follow you, and respond accordingly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dnball</title>
		<link>http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3722</link>
		<dc:creator>dnball</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:06:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3722</guid>
		<description>Twiiter, for me, is about broadcasting information that I know my followers will find interesting and receiving information that I think is useful.  I don&#039;t want a Twitter conversation.  

Cumulatively, my tweets inform my followers what I think is important in our field -- providing them with a sense of who I am.  Sprinkled in there are some (rare) personal tweets that provide a behind the scenes view of my life and personal interests.  Those personal tweets also do double duty as a release for when something&#039;s just got to be said.

Autofollow is dumb because unfocused chatter is valueless.and silly.  I&#039;ve learned much, however, from the select folks that I follow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Twiiter, for me, is about broadcasting information that I know my followers will find interesting and receiving information that I think is useful.  I don&#8217;t want a Twitter conversation.  </p>
<p>Cumulatively, my tweets inform my followers what I think is important in our field &#8212; providing them with a sense of who I am.  Sprinkled in there are some (rare) personal tweets that provide a behind the scenes view of my life and personal interests.  Those personal tweets also do double duty as a release for when something&#8217;s just got to be said.</p>
<p>Autofollow is dumb because unfocused chatter is valueless.and silly.  I&#8217;ve learned much, however, from the select folks that I follow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3721</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3721</guid>
		<description>You&#039;ve got a good point Alex.  One of my replies is currently your &quot;oh you&#039;d be surprised&quot; but I have no idea what you were replying to because due to our UK / US time difference, I posted maybe 50 other tweets since the one you replied to.

It&#039;s not a good method of having a conversation - it&#039;s more for broadcasting stuff that people may or may not care about.

I think Friendfeed has the advantage here for comments.  Their auto updating interface is pretty slick.  If only I could get it to show newest at the top (there&#039;s probably a setting I&#039;m missing)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve got a good point Alex.  One of my replies is currently your &#8220;oh you&#8217;d be surprised&#8221; but I have no idea what you were replying to because due to our UK / US time difference, I posted maybe 50 other tweets since the one you replied to.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not a good method of having a conversation &#8211; it&#8217;s more for broadcasting stuff that people may or may not care about.</p>
<p>I think Friendfeed has the advantage here for comments.  Their auto updating interface is pretty slick.  If only I could get it to show newest at the top (there&#8217;s probably a setting I&#8217;m missing)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexander</title>
		<link>http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3719</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexander</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:44:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dotcult.com/why-twitter-bots-are-effective#comment-3719</guid>
		<description>Great article, HG. You&#039;ve pretty much hit the nail on the head - Twitter is just pretty much a one-way ego leak and it&#039;s very hard to actually interact with anyone. If you reply to someone&#039;s tweet, they have no way of knowing which of theirs you&#039;re replying to, and with only 140 chars, it&#039;s hard to get context across to remedy this.

I just think that the site has a very limited feature set, and one that isn&#039;t creative, informative, or particularly worthwhile in any real sense - but I&#039;ve ranted about that before.

Your following comments are bang on, as well - but one thing you didn&#039;t mention which perturbs me about Twitter is the way my tweets are scraped and used on ecommerce sites (as &quot;reviews&quot; for products I&#039;ve mentioned) and scanned by companies looking for testimonials and me slagging them off. I was contacted by the VP of a company who&#039;s software I publicly denounced on Twitter. Companies are now more concerned about what people think about *other people&#039;s* view of their products, than they are with their customer&#039;s experience itself. Not good.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article, HG. You&#8217;ve pretty much hit the nail on the head &#8211; Twitter is just pretty much a one-way ego leak and it&#8217;s very hard to actually interact with anyone. If you reply to someone&#8217;s tweet, they have no way of knowing which of theirs you&#8217;re replying to, and with only 140 chars, it&#8217;s hard to get context across to remedy this.</p>
<p>I just think that the site has a very limited feature set, and one that isn&#8217;t creative, informative, or particularly worthwhile in any real sense &#8211; but I&#8217;ve ranted about that before.</p>
<p>Your following comments are bang on, as well &#8211; but one thing you didn&#8217;t mention which perturbs me about Twitter is the way my tweets are scraped and used on ecommerce sites (as &#8220;reviews&#8221; for products I&#8217;ve mentioned) and scanned by companies looking for testimonials and me slagging them off. I was contacted by the VP of a company who&#8217;s software I publicly denounced on Twitter. Companies are now more concerned about what people think about *other people&#8217;s* view of their products, than they are with their customer&#8217;s experience itself. Not good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

