Can You Trust My Tweet Level?
Sun, November 22, 2009 at 7:30PM This morning I read an excellent article about Metrics, and the age we're in. It inspired me to try out TweetLevel, which was referenced. Here are the results.
My Influence, Popularity, and Engagement levels on Twitter are about at where I'd expect them (meaning they are all about equal), but apparently and according to this little algorithm, I need to work better to earn your trust (on twitter anyway). Influence is based on the numbers of RT's I get, Popularity is based on the number followers I have, Engagement is a measure of how I engage, respond, and converse with tweeps, and Trust is also a measure of the number of RT's I get from my followers and the public timeline. Here's how I stack up in comparison to people I follow:
I rank a little higher than Katie at GigaOM, but lower than John at All Things Digital, and a whole grade point lower than Walt Mossberg. ...Good company as far as I'm concerned, despite my apparent inability to win trust. None of these folks know me directly (though Walt knows my Dad, and I know Walt would say he trusts him).
I would estimate 10% of all my Twitter followers, or 50 people, know me personally and professionally - folks who have met me in person, have worked with me, have had face-to-face conversations with me, etc. Here's a question for these folks... How trustworthy am I? I'd really like to know what you think. Anath's piece makes me curious - curious how trustworthy metricocracy is. ;-)
Reader Comments (2)
The first thing that came to my mind when I read this post where the Ashley-Perry Statistical Axioms:
1) Numbers are tools, not rules.
2) Numbers are symbols for things; the number and the thing are not the same.
3) Skill in manipulating numbers is a talent, not evidence of divine guidance.
4) Like other occult techniques of divination, the statistical method has a private jargon deliberately contrived to obscure its methods from nonpractitioners.
5) The product of an arithmetical computation is the answer to an equation; it is not the solution to a problem.
6) Arithmetical proofs of theorems that do not have arithmetical bases prove
nothing.
I wanted to elaborate more about this but instead I just tried the tool.
According to them Ophra Level of engagement “… is OK but could be better. You understand that even though influence is important, to many people how you engage is what counts. You don’t need to be movie star to score high in this critical category as it is your participation within niche communities that count. Take more time talking to individuals…”
Even better, The Onion level of trust is 95.4 and they say “…Your posts are interesting, credible and informative…”
Therefore, if Oprah level of engagement is low and they trust what is written in “The Onion” I’m not surprised that the trust level of the guys that created the tool @alexparish and @jonnybentwood is~ 38 and 28 respectively.
BTW and answering the question, you level of trust scores more than x3 times their calculated value.
If you are still worried about the numbers, the company they work for (@EdelmanPR) is a leading independent global PR firm and their score is 13!!!! :-)