just commented on your blog but copy/pasting here: A fine, well judged analysis. Robert said something to me via Twitter recently regarding Twitter's recent problems. I suggested that, collectively, we should consider taking it easy on Twitter as it is, after all is said and done, a free service. Robert replied that it it wasn't, in fact, a free service as he paid for it in his attention. As Robert put it; "My time isn't free. Is yours?" It struck me as a curious way of looking at things, but not an approach that I would necessarily dismiss out of hand. However, if this is a model of "commerce" that he finds validity in then I think it's something Robert should do well to remember i.e. we are all paying for Robert by OUR attention and we expect a decent ROI with less supercilious 'downtime' . - Scott O'Raw

Well written Steven. Robert will probably enjoy it to be at the center of this one ;) In general I'm thinking that there is only one relevant filter of information and that is the user himself. I have serious doubts that the mass on the Internet even remotely feels the pressure of noise. Why? Because they aren't into this rat race of wanting to know everything first and then echo about it. Chose the people and sources you wish to follow carefully and the noise disappears instantly. - Alexander van Elsas

We can still discover new things by trying out different sources, but unfollowing is more important than following. If you hit a source of noise (it's personal), then get rid of it. If the noise helps you discover new signal, well, deal with it. I'd rather not use algorithms too much, because they tend to flatten out the world, letting us all hear the same things. Having said all this, I realize I use Google on a daily basis ;-) - Alexander van Elsas

Well said Alexander! We share the same opinion on filters, and how the user and I mean the lambda-user, should be the center of content filtering. As I already said, Popularity of the content is the perversion of interest. It's not because something gets popular (by any mean) that it has to be significant for "me". Thus no algorithm that doesn't explicitly consults me on my needs will be able to filter content for me. Maybe people will be interested by our thread http://friendfeed.com/e... - directeur

But as I already said: It's up to them :) - directeur

Commented in blog, dude. - Mark Dykeman

Random thought: In one respect, social networks do not distinguish between A-listers and listers of any other letter. Thus, the feed from Scobleizer has no more, or no less, validity than All Things Jennifer. Both are different, and both are interesting. I wonder, however, about the average Twitter user with only ten followers; if you only have a few people in your network, perhaps you should only have personal friends. - Ontario Emperor from fftogo

@Alexander I definitely agree that this problem is more of an early adopter problem and that the typical web traveller probably won't even consider this discussion anything more than just plain silly. - Steven Hodson

For a minute there I thought you were talking about what we're doing at http://www.fastcompany.tv (live show starts in a few minutes). I'm also broadcasting at http://www.kyte.tv/scobleizer and have a chat room there. - Robert Scoble

@OE it might be interesting if one could assign a importance value to those in our various "friends" lists so that one's near the top would bubble to the surface faster than those at the bottom. As such let's say I gave you and Alexander a higher value than Robert. I would still get Robert's input but anything from you or Alexander would automatically place higher then Robert the moment either of you posted something. Just a thought. - Steven Hodson

Robert does produce a prodigious volume. But his S/N ratio is still much higher than most bloggers/posters/producers. Even when the ratio slips sometimes the quality of the signal is so high that not listening means you are missing a lot. Others I turn off or on occasionally when their spew gets annoying (Winer, Arrington are examples) but so for I have never tuned out Scoble for even a day. Of course this is always one of those YMMV issues. - Brian Sullivan

@Brian I agree with you concerning Robert's S/N ration but I find that in FF at least I still see the more important "signals" of his via the "Friends of Friends" option so I don't *need* to be subscribed to him. Previously I was a follower on Twitter but the noise got to be too much. His blog (and link blog) I have always subscribed to except for one very short period when *everything* was video related and I wasn't interested. Like you said though YMMV - Steven Hodson