*Real* relationships meaning ... ? - CarlC, spelling expert

Meaning...with people you actually know, who are aware of you, what you care about, etc and who trust and listen to you. Everything else is a vanity metric. - Steffan Antonas

If you climb out of the tech bubble long enough to look around, you'd discover you're absolutely wrong. - Karoli

@Karoli - Did you read my post, or are you just making a statement based on my 140 character tweet? I'm interested to hear your thoughts. I'm willing to listen humbly if you're willing to make a data driven argument that holds water instead of just saying "you live in a tech bubble, and you're wrong". I'm looking at Hitwise Data, blog posts by people who have hundreds of thousands of followers, click through data etc. How about telling me why you think I'm off base. I'm all ears. ;-) - Steffan Antonas

I read your post. I also realize I'm rapidly gaining a 'cranky lady geek' reputation here, but to say that only REAL LIFE relationships matter is simply ignoring reality. When you begin such an analysis by looking at the SUL as a measure of engagement, you've already hit the metric. No one but entertainers and geeks give a rolling rip about that SUL. Certainly real folks don't. I have 6,000 people following me. I follow 2000+. each of those follows is a PERSON who has interacted with me. Out of those follows, I have a far smaller, private list of people who are my close community -- my FRIENDS. I don't share that list because I'm not interested in hurting anyone's feelings, but those are the people that I've met face to face in some cases but in many others, I haven't. They're people who interfaced with me on NewsGang Live, who were faithful regulars to the show and watching the show, who were there when I lost my job and are there today. Not ONE of them is on the SUL - Karoli

Tech blogging ,particularly when viewed thru the lens that is Robert Scoble, focuses on the metric of the next cool thing. Those of us who actually remain, discover community. For 16 years, community on the web has been my business. Political twitterers get it; art twitterers get it; mommy twitterers get it. When it is not viewed through the metric lens, what you discover is that REAL RELATIONSHIPS form, grow and thrive on Twitter. [/end rant] - Karoli

or to put it in even shorter terms, leave the metrics; look at the conversation. Metrics are gamed. - Karoli

So you unfollowed all those people who were following you? I'm sure you kept them as followers though. Kind of a huge douchebag move in my book. Yes I read your post and your weak logic for doing so. You're getting what you want to oh well, right? - Self Deprecate Humor

I didn't unfollow anyone. What are you talking about? I follow those who engage. I'm not interested in following spammers and marketers or link farms. - Karoli

Not you :P You're awesome - Self Deprecate Humor

My concern is having all those followers that he followed back and then one day running a script that kind of kicked them all in the balls. - Self Deprecate Humor

ah, okay gotcha. There are lots of people who do that. I follow the ones who I think are interesting even if they don't follow me, but again, unfollowing is a sign of following metrics...something I think creates false impressions. - Karoli

Just to add my two cents, the reason you're off base is that people don't stop being "real" when they go online. They're still "real" people and if they engage in "real" interaction, they develop "real" relationships. As one who met a "twitter friend" in "real" life, I can tell you that the transition was seamless, both of us felt completely at ease because we "really" did know each other. "Real" friends online, in short, ARE people "who are aware of you, what you care about, etc and who trust and listen to you". If you haven't had this experience, I'm sorry for you because you are missing out on one of the most positive and satisfying aspects of twitter. - Mark Welkie

Karoli: I unfollowed everyone because my inbound column in Seesmic had turned totally useless and so had my DMs thanks to spam. Now I've refollowed 16,000 people -- all manually -- and Twitter is 100x more useful today. I'd do it again in a second! - Robert Scoble

Robert, your inbound stream is unmanageable no matter what. You're right -- the automatic follow of everyone who followed you was a mistake. I follow manually, usually as a result of a conversation. It seems to work. - Karoli

I can see how one would get overwhelmed by an enormous following, quantity is not quality. The relationships will be superficial. But as one who's spent the last 20 years building relationships by virtue of the written word alone, I will join the growing chorus of dissent. :) Before I was online, I was a pen pal. I wrote to over 50 people, in almost as many countries--by hand, thankyouverymuch--and used the postal service. When I got wired, I approached my online relationships in the same way--it was just a helluva lot faster than waiting weeks or months for the postman to bring a response. Some of my current real life friends were first made on paper, later over the intertubes. Real people; real relationships. I've traveled overseas and stayed in the homes of these folks and they've come to me and stayed in mine. If you put yourself out on Twitter, sincerely, and respond to people, sincerely, true relationships are formed. You get out what you put in...not everyone will respond sincerely. There are a lot of bullshit artists and fakers--they reveal themselves, sooner or later. Those who are sincere and real also reveal themselves and are to be cherished. - Deborah

This is a great discussion...Steffan, are you seeing why I answered the way I did now? All the obsession over the SUL is silly, because the SUL, like the new retweet, is a gameable metric. True community is not measured in clicks and follows. - Karoli

I like how LinkedIn managed the scorekeeping that arose on their site. They capped the visible connections at 500. I think that twitter used the follower count and associated gaming to grow their network. I would love to see twitter cap the publicly visible followers at 500. It would change the community for the better. - Jim Posner

Love that term-- "Vanity Metric" - Kirste Mitchell from iPhone

Is there a short summary of what you're saying? - Patricia

Yeah, approach ppl like numbers, you get no relationship. - Deborah

Karoli was batting a 1000 on this thread. :) - Micah

Hmm so my relationships on Twitter aren't real. Thanks for the enlightenment. - Mona Nomura

great post Steffan! Agree! - Alexey

@Mark Welkie - Right on. That's exactly what I'm talking about. I COMPLETELY agree with you, in fact, you've said better what I couldn't above in the third or fourth comment from the top - People don't stop becoming "real" when they're online. Totally the opposite. The beauty of Twitter is that you can create relationships with real people you've never met or would never have had a connection with otherwise. Making the connection itself (whether it's on Twitter or or face to face, over email, on IM, is what makes it real. Making the connection is what matters. I really can't stand when people assume that when you use the word "real" it means face to face, offline. The medium doesn't matter. It's ALL real. If you're having a conversation (as @Karoli says), THAT is a real realtionship - which is the exact point I was trying to make when I said "only real relationships matter'. I should have said "only meaningful connections/conversations" matter. - Steffan Antonas

@Karoli - Yes. Definitely a good discussion, but I do want to clear a few things up.... #1 I linked to my comment above to illustrate that EVEN the people on the SUL (in this case Anil Dash) do not get inundated with @'s etc - my point was NOT to glorify the SUL in any way. Just the opposite. I have many problems with the SUL and what it does to the ecosystem. The real point is that the only way to make a difference is through engagement, connection and conversation - which comes from creating relationships (whether they start online or offline doesnt matter- they are all "real"). I honestly think we're making the same point and that we're actually not disagreeing at all. don't you? - Steffan Antonas

@Mona - That's not what I'm saying at all. If you're talking to people, engaging and having conversations on Twitter - that's real. You mistook the word "real" for "offline". Perhaps my fault, but I live online, so I don't separate "offline from online" when it comes to relationships. It's all real. - Steffan Antonas

@Deborah - Thank you for that excellent summary. You said in one line what I was trying to say in a 3000 word blog post! See above - "Yeah, approach ppl like numbers, you get no relationship. - Deborah" - Steffan Antonas

@Karoli - Btw, did you read the actual blog post, or just the comment I linked to. The post itself was what I was talking about when I asked "did you read it", not the comment. I think that's where the confusion about the SUL came from. ;-) - Steffan Antonas

Steffan, thanks, glad I could encapsulate. I also think there has been a bit of misfired communicating in this thread. I went back and read your whole linked post and see we're on the same page. Your response to Mark makes that even more clear to me. Still, I've met ppl who consider all online interaction as "not real." And because many are using Twitter just to amass followers to whom to broadcast wares, the "ecosystem" (love that characterization) is utterly polluted. If all I am to you is a potential "mark," any potential for relationship is shot, from the giddyup. It looks like it's reached a critical mass point, as Twitter becomes a victim of its own success, and the ecosystem is breaking down...which, I'm thinking is a good thing--witness how you and Scobel are rethinking its use. I'm hoping the breakdown will cause the numbers junkies to lose interest and go away, leaving the real people to create real relationships. Keep publishing how ineffective it is as a marketing tool! <evil grin> - Deborah

I read your blogpost and I agree with you 100%. You've echoed my own thoughts and feelings about my Twitter experience. Karoli made some great points as well. I think there was some miscommunication going on there because you are both saying similar things. IIRC, the great follower race began in late November or early December of 2008. Long before the SUL. Having followers just for the sake of having followers, seems to miss the point. And Twitter has definitely changed since April 2009, and not for the better. - Mark Davidson from BuddyFeed