Comments on: Twitter Grader Follows @‘s

By: 14 Tools of Highly Effective Twitter Users - Kenny Hyder

14 Tools of Highly Effective Twitter Users - Kenny Hyder — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 08:08:02 +0000

[…] Twitter Grader is a twitter ranking tool that grades your profile based on a number of factors and gives you a grade on a scale of 1–100, as well as a global rank in proportion to the rest of users. It is a fun tool that allows you to see just how “elite” your twitter profile is. I have done extensive blogging on this tool here: (1,2,3,4) […]

By: Chris Blair

Chris Blair — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 05:47:26 +0000

I know there were alot of issues with Twitter changing the way @replies worked with how they were showing in the public timelines, and it could be an interesting investigation to look at what “client” the people who go up/down from the new algo are/were using (eg are some clients recording your @‘s with the twitter grader system better than others?) /// Another thing to monitor could be is a one word @reply saying “thanks” as valuable and worth as much as a full 140 character response. Is a valuable response one that gets an @response back to your @response?

By: Twitter Grader Part 4 - Kenny Hyder

Twitter Grader Part 4 - Kenny Hyder — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:58:49 +0000

[…] after my last post, I was contacted by several friends on twitter that their grades had shot up significantly (mine at […]

By: Michael Russell

Michael Russell — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 23:18:17 +0000

Really appreciate your insights into the mysterious sausage grinder that is the Twitter Grader algorithm.

Lord knows I’m not complainin’…I’m just thrilled to find myself up in the 90-somethings with @laelaporte, @garyvee, @chrisbrogan and other notables.

By: Dave L

Dave L — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:24:40 +0000

So this would seem to mean that moving DMs over to @‘s would increase your grade.

By: LPetrides

LPetrides — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 09:59:18 +0000

Just curious: Earlier on, it also seemed that part of algo included relative strength of network (how many followers the people you followed or followed you have). As someone who has single-handedly introduced twitter to dozens of people who have subsequently created accounts (but are still newbies themselves), is my score lower than if I just followed or am followed by the “biggies” scoble etc.?

By: Dharmesh Shah

Dharmesh Shah — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 05:45:32 +0000

Kenny: Thanks again for all of your time and effort. I think we’re at a point now where the grading algorithm is relatively decent. Always more work that can be done.

@david: I’m with Kenny on this one. I just don’t think that having stand-alone tweets is really a signal of quality that should be weighted highly. These kinds of tweets are nearly indistinguishable from spam.

By: admin

admin — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 04:47:04 +0000

@david — that’s an interesting view, and I definitely see your point, the problem is, that it is very easy to say things that stand alone, and “spam” a twitter profile. Creating conversation that other people want to get involved in identifies you as a human, and an interesting one at that. User interaction and collaboration is the heartbeat of social media on the web.

By: David Leonhardt

David Leonhardt — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 01:05:55 +0000

Well, just because I like being a rebel, I’ll take an opposing view. Although some @ comments are worthwhile, one really has to be careful to provide context…otherwise you end up filling up all your followers’ home pages with unintelligible bits of conversations. After a couple weeks on Twitter, I have already deleted some people because all they do is add noise with no meaning to my page.

In 140 words, tweets really should be able to stand on their own. If I was in charge of grading, I would give more weight to a person who is able to create tweets that do not result in a lot of @ noise.

By: Austin

Austin — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 21:39:18 +0000

sweet! All my @ing has finally paid off! hahaha