Twitter Lists- Im Not Down

Chris, you can't be serious.

You're not down with lists because people feel left out?

a) anyone complaining about feeling left out has issues that have nothing to do with technology

b) you've never been a part of a list and then proudly talked about it? (Top bloggers, top influentials, etc)?

Come on man.

You know I love you, so this comment is purely just to expand the discussion, not disagree, per se.

Can I ask, if you don't dig lists on Twitter, why you have an icon to the right proclaiming your rank on a list (AdAge Power 150)?

Certainly you've been on other "Top" lists as well -- some of which you've likely mentioned or tweeted. Many, many people would probably love to be on those lists, but they're not included for whatever reason (which might make them feel left out, or unsuccessful.)

Why are some lists okay, and some lists aren't? Is it because certain lists are based on quantifiable notions (traffic, income, community votes, something?)

Twitter lists are a no or a yes (there's no ranking within the list), and not something anyone has to look at unless they want to click through and check it out. It's opt-in to notice it, unlike a Follow Friday (unless you filter out the hashtag.)

I think it's Twitter's way of making the web interface more relevant/functional (since people have already been creating list filters on TweetDeck and others for ages now, although those are not public. Then again, the ones on Twitter don't need to be, either.)

Just my two cents.

Couldn't have better stated.

I have to agree. Twitter lists are VERY exclusionary. As one of my favorite people, Jeffrey Holland says:"You may say most positively that 'Susan is pretty and Sandra is bright,' but all Susan will remember is that she isn’t bright and Sandra that she isn’t pretty."

I think that the another big issue with Twitter lists is that people will misunderstand what being on a list really represents. There's more to getting on a list than being 'important', and sometimes, not being on a list can reflect that you are UNIQUE, which is pretty cool.
Want to consider this a little more, see "Twitter Lists: Coolness or Ease of Categorization?" -- http://is.gd/4IyVY

I don't think lists are any more exclusionary than following people are. I follow you, but you don't follow me. It doesn't hurt my feelings any more than it would if you did follow me, but didn't put me on the "cool" list. All social media is just a digital popularity contest. People have to learn that.

But people become 'popular' for a very different set of reasons...don't folks think? I don't think the popularity contest idea is valid, when every single person has their own right to make lists and their own criteria. Aston Kutcher has a million followers...are any of us seriously bent about that? Mashable makes a ton of lists - because the site is very very useful particular to the subset of people who are heavy users of twitter.

If I don't make ANY lists - I might assume that what I am tweeting isn't that funny, useful, varied, timely, deep, helpful...etc etc etc.. The only reason I would feel bad - would be if I set out to delivery some list of quality or value - but failed...And that would be on me - not other people. It would be VERY useful feedback if I was trying to build a notable presence on twitter.

Or maybe I am not on a list, because I just don't use twitter that way - I don't tweet. How would I take that personally. I have very dear friends irl who have twitter accounts but don't tweet much... I could put a ton of them on a list called lurkers...

I use twitter lists a little differently. I look at the lists I am on. Most of the time it is Dad or Blogger and I go and find those people I am not following and follow them. I also look at list of people I am really interested in (that's everyone right) and see who I am missing and I should be following

BuckDaddy - VERY good point.

I see more value in a list from an expert, than in the delusion of being part of it.

I am loving how revealing twitter lists are - about people and their personalities. To me, it is all very fascinating. Making what should be a private list into a public list is no different from name dropping on twitter.

Over time, I think people will gain respect and reputation for making and sharing really useful lists as opposed to the public lists driven by strictly personal motivations.

As an individual, I will try not to obsess over the lists I am in or not. It will continue to be about real relationships (as opposed to lists and numbers) for a long time to come ....

Seriously? People's self-worth balances on whether or not they're on someone's twitter list? Sounds like they need to get a life.

<Sorry for rude tone coming in 3, 2, 1...> Are people really this sensitive these days? Yikes! Lists are an organizing tool that happens to result in a tacit recommendation to the users within.

If someone honestly stops to sulk over not making a particular list...they need to re-evaluate their priorities in a hurry.

Respectful disagreement, Chris. The web is filled with cliques and clubs and people are excluded every day. Lists of top bloggers and experts are always subjective. Twitter in itself is exclusionary when you think about it - people follow who they want to follow, or who it's cool to follow but don't allow the rest into their lives. I like lists as they give me a peek into other Tweeters' likes and dislikes and allow me to read a Tweets that don't get lost in all the noise.

Lists are in the eye of the beholder. If the ego is bruised from being left off, major soul searching needs to be done on where importance is placed (life vs Twitter)

Sorry. But it's just insane to suggest lists are bad because some people might feel left out. People don't follow me. Is Twitter bad? People don't read my blog. Are blogs bad? I didn't get into university. Are universities bad? I didn't win the race. Are races bad? I'm not on Scoble's blogroll. Are blogrolls bad? Is Scoble bad? Who worries about this?? It's completely asinine and I can't even believe it's being discussed. And you're list examples are terrible: "People I pay attention to"?? C'mon!

I think there's room for a lot of people to do some serious self esteem work. I don't want to put folks down, but so much of this seems like folks are still processing high school hurts.

I'm not saying I can't be hurt... but man, I think people really need to do some inner work here. Are your self images that unstable?

I don't mean this as an attack, but there are a few billion people on the net and many more not. These lists are a tiny slice of humanity. I think some perspective is in order.

Note this is coming from a total high school loner..You know that Ally Sheedy character...she was more functional than I was in high school.

Just go with the simplest of examples: someone has a list called "People I Pay Attention To." You're not on that list. Your next reactions are: _____ .

Right?

I guess I learned somewhere along the line that my opinion of myself is more important and affects my outlook more than any subset of people.

I understand - this ideal of incusiveness - and share it. I think my concern would be more about people from one niche not cross pollinating enough.. but I think most bright people to intentionally cross pollinate.

I would also have a problem if I thought it would make the appealing randomness of twitter disappear. I've met so many wonderful people, that I have not much in common with, but whom I enjoy none the less. Self segregation is a problem, but that's a problem in life.

I guess I land on the side of more tools...because people are people, and the nasty ones will continue to be nasty - The curious, playful, inclusive will continue to act on those values...

I do get what you are saying Chris. I don't expect the world to take care of my feelings at every turn, maybe because I am the only one who has any power over how I actually feel. I hope that makes sense!

Happy to have found your blog! :D

Sorry one more thought... I think one of the oldest human dynamics is the ingroup/outgroup dynamic....causes much human grief, I think we'd agree. But how basic is that to our basic psychological make up?

I consider myself a giant one world humanist... but I still find I want to surround myself with a certain kind of person. This type doesn't share skin color, eye color, education level, niche, or very much else. They are curious, playful, active problem solvers, causticly funny, bright, questioning... and a bit world weary and a bit dark all in one...

Do lists make it easier or harder to find that tribe...

Yawn.

I want to see lists of thoughtful people. I want to find new people through the lists of thoughtful people. I also have an incentive to be thoughtful and use the tool thoughtfully.

I learned living in New York City, that if I took time to be down about parties I was not invited to, I wouldn't enjoy the parties I was free to throw.

I think the idea that 'people are going to feel left out meme' doesn't really take into account that friends and followers already do that... There are millions of people on twitter yes?

We are responsible for our feelings and as Eleanor Roosevelt said, no one can make you feel inferior without your consent.

Brogan I can see your point of view on this. It's similar to why I don't have a blogroll. It's not that I don't care about other people's feelings, but I'm not responsible for their feelings. I don't want to deal with the whining. Nobody can ask me to be on my blogroll because I don't have one.

If you have to ask to be on a list, you probably shouldn't be on it. If someone asks who else should be on a list, don't name yourself. You just gave yourself away as narcissistic and overly needy. If your ego is that fragile, get off the interwebs.

Chris, I'm basically with you here. I think that lists are net good for Twitter, Inc., and net good for businesses that want to do marketing, but it's not clear if they're net good for the average user, for a variety of reasons, some of which you point out. Another reason? What if prominent people start putting together public versions of "shit lists" that reflect poorly on users? Mark

I respectfully disagree here, man.

People who see getting listed as a matter of status are the same people who are counting every follower and then get hurt when someone unfollows them. You can't worry about that.

Chris, now you've really got me thinking with this "I don't want to exclude anyone." That's exactly what's behind the schools not wanting to recognize excellence, not wanting anyone to feel left out...and creating a system that's graduating nothing but mediocrity.

If you went into a restaurant and asked your server "What do you recommend?" would you accept this as a reasonable answer: "Oh, I recommend everything. I wouldn't want the chef to think that there was a dish of his that I didn't like." Would you continue to read the reviews of a film critic who praised every movie just so that none of the actors, writers, directors, etc. would feel left out?

I think anyone who feels like their ego is bruised needs to get over it. I'll approach lists the same way I approached followers. If you don't provide value to me, I'm not going to follow you or subject other people via lists. When people talk about information overload, this is part of the problem - we follow people who follow us because many of us don't have the gut to say no, or to at least self-assess if this person will add to my experience in a positive way. Then come the inevitable complaints about information overload.

When I joined Twitter, I had a reciprocal approach when it came to followers. That was an enormous mistake. Now I am constantly curating my list and keeping it at the 500 range. These lists will even better help.

I have a bigger problem on the other account I manage, @mediabistro. Like Chris, we follow everyone who follows us. That has proved to be fruitless. The "giving good community" argument in automatically following doesn't work for me anymore. Now that lists are here, it's very likely that I'm going to use a tool to unfollow the nearly 50,000 people who follow @mediabistro, and then start over with selective following and good list building, public and private. For those who are power users, we have an obligation to provide the people following with the best experience possible, and that means being able to decide weather someone is worthy to be a follower, or on a list.

List based on location (i.e. San Diego), industry (i.e. Nonprofit) and/or interests (i.e. Swimming) seem to be useful, but list like "best people in social media" may be more harmful than beneficial. List of the 2nd type should be more for private use.

Now, the above also depends on each individual person. Creating clicks is usually harmful (think High School all over again), but ranking folks, companies, products, etc... is part of how we operate in society today. Good, Bad?

People have been making lists for years. Top 10s, 100s, Favorite this or that, or whatever. Long before the Internet, let alone Twitter, existed. Yes, lists are exclusionary for the bulk of people, cause a list with everyone or everything on it is useless.

Chris, you do list posts on this site and I'm sure many out there with online applications, ways to promote their blog or tools for listening wished they had been included on them, but weren't. Should you not do posts like this anymore, because some may have felt left out?

I think not.

Twitter lists are pretty much the same, if you point to 20 of this, or my favorite of that, or the best of whatever. It depends on who is making the list and whether we trust them or not. It's there opinion, just like any other list found anywhere else online or off.

Would I like to be on every Top TV Bloggers list on Twitter that gets created? Of course I would, but don't expect to be and will not feel slighted when that turns out to be the case. Just like when some one does a similar list on their blog or site, it's the same to me.

I guess that's just a long way of saying, why is a Twitter list worse than any other list found anywhere else?

Already experienced the same thing about leaving folks out. Inevitable is right.
As for going private, definitely useful for some things. Especially to avoid 'you don't love me anymore' comments. I do believe though that having a public list of resources is useful for sharing. Likely there aren't going to be 500 libraries you use for example.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Todd

I've got public lists with more or less objective criteria- people who live in New Jersey, people who work with WordPress, people I've met in person (hey, you're on that one!) but I also have more subjective lists that I've chosen to keep private. It's human nature to want to feel included, and hopefully doing it this way will mitigate the hurt feelings.

I'm enjoying lists as a discovery engine, and also to follow people from towns I've live in or have a lot of friends in. Also to list folks who've appeared on my BlogTalkRadio show. Setting people into categories like "Coolest of the Cool," not so useful or nice.

I have to say that I'm loving lists. I filled up my allotted 20 in no time (WAY too many interests) and wanted more. Being able to check other peoples lists, and finding other tweeters I might never have found is terrific.

If people are horribly hurt by not being on a particular list, IMO they need to thicken up their skin a bit. The internet (and life) is not all about having ones ego stroked. There could be any number of reasons for not being on a particular list. I'm certainly not going to hunt through my followers lists to see if I'm there - what a narcissistic waste of time that could be better spent tweeting and meeting new people.

I agree. I'm doing my lists in private as well. There's no need to alienate or disclude anybody on Twitter.

I like and hate the list feature all at the same time !!!!! But its still a pretty cool way to keep track of people.

Sure lists are bad from that perspective. Even worse than not being on a list at all is if you are put on a list say of "people that are lame" etc. I think it is a progression of twitter and was based on a huge demand from the users. It will be interesting to see where it goes.

I'm leaning your way too. Twitter lists are a handy way to sort, but do they need to be public?

One exception: creating lists for awareness. I'm mad passionate about Team Diabetes. I run marathons for them around the world and created a Twitter List of people out there working it for Diabetes.

That's a list I'll share on my page, and with you here, now:
http://www.twitter.com/buzzbishop/team-diabetes/

While I like the idea of having lists, so that I can easily jump between topics, the issue of whether they should be public or private is still an open one for me. My thought is to leave my lists public for the first few weeks, then see whether there is any benefit to keeping them that way.

I think a lot of public Lists will go private which is perfectly fine. They aren't there to flatter the people you put on them, they exist to be useful to the Twitter user.

But people have got to get over themselves and not have such sensitive feelings. I'm not on some Lists I kind of expected to be on and, guess what? They aren't MY lists, they belong to the creator and they can define them however they want.

Plus, just because someone creates a List doesn't mean that they'll actively use it. I've had Lists for over a week and I've created some Lists, deleted others that I found weren't useful, started new ones. I'm continually putting people on & taking others off. They aren't written in stone. I could delete all 20 of my Lists & decide to organize them in a completely different way. You play around with LIsts.

It's a pity if people's self-esteem is tied to their presence or absence on anyone's List.

Okay, so HOW do you delete or rename a list?? I can't figure that part out. Tried, couldn't do it. Sigh.

As for the other, my lists are basically categorizing the people I follow into cooking, sci-fi, soap opera, art, news, travel etc - and I need MORE lists, and to rename others - not sure how that could offend anyone. I will confess to being irritated that I wasn't on a list for a group I belonged to, but then a second later I remembered I haven't actually belonged to it for about six months (and wasn't active for a while before that), so I couldn't be irritated!

Lists might be useful for grouping in terms of themes. People in Indy Car racing, people in a certain organization, nonprofits dealing with homelessness. But I agree with you Chris, if you start creating lists of "cool people in social media," or "best writers," then yes, you're going to create some problems.

I haven't played with any lists, preferring instead to create groups in TweetDeck.

I agree with you and have kept my lists private. But I do appreciate the people who have made their lists public and included me -- even if it's just 4 -- because I have a hard time finding people with shared interests who aren't trying to sell me something, and the lists have made that a lot easier.

Here is the problem with getting all warm and fuzzy with the populace, where does it end? So now middle schools have no losers in sports everyone is a winner! Except everyone isn't a winner only the team who won is a winner. Do we extend this to the lottery maybe? I felt kinda left out I didn't win 37 million dollars... If we continue to cater to the ultra sensitivity of some we only create an environment of more sensitivity and then what? Game shows where everybody wins? Harvard Law excepts everyone so less qualified people don't feel bad? It appears people have increasingly lost what it means to find their own intrinsic value and they need to get this back.

It's a loose loose for everyone in the long run so do your part for the sake of human evolution and make a list!

Another point I don't like about lists is that you never get to 'meet' or 'see' in an easy way, the people that are following you via a list to follow them back if you wished.

I'm using my lists to categorize by subject matter or locality instead of subjective descriptions. (maybe its the HR in me) and I've put it out there to my followers that if you are on a particular one my lists and don't understand why, or think your business is best categorized differently. Let me know. I'll listen to all reasonable discussion. (but they are still MINE)

Its when we begin to categorize people by personality, or favorable traits, or anything that's actually subjective in nature, that we run into "left out" territory.

No one wants to be left out, but really, your opinion of me has absolutely no bearing my opinion of you. In love, life, business... we think what we think, and to anyone with self-awareness, the outside world really doesn't influence our thoughts, only our actions.

Make your lists, (although i know its a pain for my little group, I KNOW its a pain for you) We categorize, its the way our brains work.

Hi Chris!
I wish I had time to make lists. I started one to capture all the blogging experts and got distracted. Seems like it would be tweetdeck-like, but without a max tweets per hour limit. I tried to use tweetdeck to do something like lists before. But I think I gave it cramps, selecting too many names for one feed.
I set my first list to private because I'd be compiling it for my own use.
It seems being on a lot of lists could become a driving force. Like getting votes for the shortyawards. Everyone pitching you to get your vote or be added to your public list. That is, if I were on the Twitter leaderboard with the name Chris Brogan or Guy Kawasaki.
What you're already experiencing is the unhealthy side. That's tough. Everyone wants to grow their followers.
If we could let go of that, and push out great content or whatever we want to use Twitter for, like connecting...which is a blast, the lists should all work out. I don't care if I get on a list. I can still reach out and touch you. Only virtually. giggle
I don't know how you find out you've been "listed." I do think I'm going to go set up a list for meaningful friends I've found here...like the ones who reached out my first Christmas without my Dad. I find you get close for a week or two, check in off and on the next couple months and poof! Where'd they go? :) I like that value to lists. Maybe one for events: blogworld, blogher, marketingprofs, twitter conferences, et al. Military compadres. Entrepreneurs. Grand Canyon lovers. People with great advice. Whacked out tweeters like @shitmydadsays, to add color to my day.
Okay, I better let you go read someone else and get to work on this. Lists is going to eat up some time.

Great point Chris, thanks for making it. I like the idea of using it to create lists of people in our industry who use twitter so it is easier for someone new to have a pool in, but I just disable my personal list based on this very valid point.

I've only done one list so far and it was of participants of an online event, anyone who participates and lets me know their twitter name goes on the list. I'm not really comfortable with doing other lists right now (I also use tweetdeck so I can organize that way privately). Especially with close to 4k followers I can't possibly sort through them all, it just wouldn't be fair.

I mostly use the list feature as a navigational tool. I don't have to scroll through countless pages looking for them any more. There are several people, I can't figure out how to categorize. Their expertise is not necessarily why I follow them. I might keep a techie person around because they have a dry whit and say something unexpected and comical sometimes, so I might list them as "Friend" because of it. Some people are not listed yet for this reason. I will reset mine to private to avoid hurting anyone.

Agreed, as a social networking journalist I started beta testing this feature weeks ago; everything was fine weeks ago without problem. As Twitter started it's full roll out, which insiders say will be completed by the first part of November, I started to be selfishly direct messaged. "Why am I not on your list" and even a "You bitch, I'm removing you from my list!" (from someone who was indeed included in a private listing.) I can only shake my head at the attempts of social media follower domination. I have decided that 90% of my lists, are going private if it includes people with "feelings"; lists for applications, business, technology and so forth will remain public.

Pinged you on Twitter with a joke after seeing the one public list you'd made and THEN read this post. Whoops.

Could well be that your other lists are private, and for thoughtful reasons, given your thoughts on this. Lists are by nature exclusionary - there's always a #11 or #101 that didn't make it or a party someone can't enter. This feels like blogrolls all over again, in some ways, only more fluid and yes, real-time.

As usual, comments in your community of readers adds useful perspective. I tend to gravitate towards the position of @AdrielHampton & @nwjerseyliz: this is one more tool. Lists are extremely helpful for both power users who need a way to sort streams and newbies who are trying to figure out who to follow and why.

Thoughtfully curated lists by influential thinkers who really know a subject or market are going to be extremely useful to the public, along with niche marketers, advertisers or beat journalists. Once they're integrated into third-party clients like Tweetdeck. Seemic, Tweetie, Echofon and UberTwitter, I suspect that utility will skyrocket.

You make lists here on and off again; for good or ill, they're some of the biggest traffic drivers on the Web. We all seem to gravitate towards them, just like the unfortunate horse race that politics has become in many election seasons.

I think you're spot on to highlight a need for care in building lists of people and lists of companies, brands, products or services, especially when it comes to building relationships on a more human-centric Web.

You are wrong on one count, however: lists are NOT static. We can add, subtract and amend as we like. I already see list-begging going on, just like RT begs and link begs before that. Since Twitter is giving this ability to its community - unlike, say, the suggested users list - we can adjust and be fluid in curating them as new voices deserve ears.

Happy Halloween, big guy!

I just discovered Twitter Lists and began making some immediately. All private. They are for me to find Twitter/bloggers, in categories I want to peruse often.

I probably will add a list of Just Friends. And that too will be private for the very reason you mention...

You'll be on a list, though I read you daily already in my emails, so you're easy to find. :)

Yeah. I'd be really mad if you made a list and left me off of it. I'd probably have to send angry tweets all night about 'some tweeple'.

Folders are great for my reader. Then I can put each RSS feed into its proper category, but Twitter is social and networking. The human factor changes everything.

If everyone on Twitter was a geek it would work. We do love our lists and folders.
Most of us can't find anything on a computer unless it's in a folder or file. Lets face it--You can't grep Twitter.

I never thought of it that way. I'm actually excited that I appear on ANY list. Even something like "Friends from NY." But I do agree that some people may feel left out. I too will opt to sticking to my Tweetdeck lists. I still get the functionality I need without having any feel left out that I didn't group them.

It's turning Twitter into high school!

Agree with you Chris and thanks for bring this up. Thought of this while building my own lists so kept them private. However, there are some public lists built by news organizations, business advisors, social media experts such as mashable, etc. which help inform and have a broader subscriber appeal.

I share your sentiments for keeping the majority of lists private, as they are created as a method for organizing the users that I follow. However, I've also noticed a trend of various users creating public lists for the city that they live in, and I feel that such lists could be useful for learning more about the conversations and ideas taking place in one's own back yard. However, allowing only one contributor causes the number of users that the creator follows to become the limiting factor in that list's usefulness to the public. If multiple users could collaborate on one list, that would allow each list to possess more value, and it would also cut down on the number of lists for a particular city or concept. Obviously, there would be a need for some sort of user privilege option to permit lists from becoming saturated with users that were either not relevant or not providing a value perceived as worthwhile to the creators, but I think it's a concept worth exploring.

Hm. I hadn't thought about it from this perspective. I was interested in having a vehicle that I used in lieu of lots of mentions. Lists *can* be exclusionary, but I think there's room, also, for them to be helpful. Possibly, maybe. Hm. I have several that I've made, privately, which will help me to keep things organized. Hm. I have no interest in making anyone feel left out. Hm.

Did I mention "hm"?

OK. I'm done with "hm". And I think I might have to disagree with you here.

While lists certainly CAN be exclusionary, they can also be very helpful. If there are people with whom I've interacted and whose input I've benefited from, then I see no real harm in naming them on a list. The reason that I was phumphering in my comment above was that the thought of the lists being hurtful to anyone hadn't even occurred to me.

When I first started using Twitter and started following someone whose words I found helpful, or funny, or simply enjoyed, I would often check to see who THEY were following, so that I might find others whose input I enjoyed. I see no real difference here, other than the lists might be easier to follow.

So, unless people are making lists with titles that go something like "Here's The List of People Who I Think Are Cool & If You're Not, I Don't", I don't see it as harmful (and I like to think I'm pretty considerate of people's feelings).

Thanks for your perspective, Chris.

I really think folks need to step back and reevaluate their priorities if they're going to get bent out of shape if they were or weren't included on a list.

There is value in a private list for personal browsing, but I think the list idea is a great way for someof us with more experience to help the Twitter newbies get started. I get asked several times a week about who should be followed in a particular niche. I can put together a list for that niche and it makes it easy for someone to get started.

I think the benefits outweigh the downside, but then again, I'm also the type of person who doesn't get caught up in who (or how many) are following me.

Twitter lists are fine. A novelty with lots of potential.
Public lists are a start, they will last until everyone figures out who goes where. Then will come listorious.com. It is here already and it is exploding. I believe that is where public lists will end, or something similar.
Private lists are useful for the owner. They will last longer. One curious thing I noticed which has huge potential is that you can add people you do not follow to private lists. Whoa...
I agree with what you say. It stinks to be left out.

It's not just exclusion that can be hurtful, it's also an oblique method of criticism and name-calling - see here: http://twitter.com/patroclus/statuses/5292952928 though I'm sure twitter will be looking out for things this extreme or illegal it will take time to get used to this. As I said earlier, there's an important difference between tagging your friends' content and actually tagging your friends.

I'm not sure that Twitter Lists are any more exclusionary than Follow Friday recommendations. For anyone who sends them out, it's inevitable that you're going to be selective. I think most everyone has faced that long ago and dealt with it.

What I really like about Lists (already) is that they *are* (at least when done with some editorial judgment) a presentation of who a user feels are the "must reads." There have been many times when I've said to myself, "I think Morton Frobischer is great. I'm sure that anyone he follows would be someone I'd enjoy following"....only to find that Morton follows 1000 people. Now, I could embark on the tedious task of going through the pages of people he follows, attempting to divine who among them are his favorites (and for what reason)...but I've got better ways to spend a day. Twitter Lists holds the promise of leading me to exactly the names I wanted...in minutes.

Returning to Follow Friday...if Twitter Lists could replace that already-tired tradition, I'd be thrilled. I've lost track of how many times I've clicked on a user name link to see if that person might interest me, only to find that his/her stream is filled with nothing but "thank yous" for all of the FF recommendations. I can't learn anything about that person without going back at least a day.

I agree, it stinks being left out! I have noticed some of the same issues. I have people that belong in many different groups and it's a little unclear where to classify everyone!

I'm not sure that Twitter Lists are any more exclusionary than Follow Friday recommendations. For anyone who sends them out, it's inevitable that you're going to be selective. I think most everyone has faced that long ago and dealt with it.

What I really like about Lists (already) is because they *are* (at least when done with some editorial judgment) a presentation of who a user feels are the "must reads." There have been many times when I've said to myself, "I think Morton Frobischer is great. I'm sure that anyone he follows would be someone I'd enjoy following"....only to find that Morton follows 1000 people. Now, I could embark on the tedious task of going through the pages of people he follows, attempting to divine who among them are his favorites (and for what reason)...but I've got better ways to spend a day. Twitter Lists holds the promise of leading me to exactly the names I wanted...in minutes.

Returning to Follow Friday...if Twitter Lists could replace that already-tired tradition, I'd be thrilled. I've lost track of how many times I've clicked on a user name link to see if that person might interest me, only to find that his/her stream is filled with nothing but "thank yous" for all of the FF recommendations. I can't learn anything about that person without going back at least a day.

some lists (as some twitter accounts) are more about quantity over quality. hopefully there are enough twitter users who understand the difference and will use the lists to their advantage to group interesting/new/relevant folks to follow and its all based upon a trusted recommendation

the purpose for creating my public lists is to group people together in a way that is most helpful for others to find people of a certain grouping. yes i will leave people out and maybe piss them off in the process but i dont feel i need to apologize for leaving them out.

Lists? Groups? Difference? Confused! Don't really care since no one has convinced me of any VALUE to ME.

I think part of this is about intent rather than implementation - after all, an exclusionary list in private is still an exclusionary list. At least in public it can be talked about. Still, I don't think most folks are setting up lists to BE exclusionary - they're tools to help filter information or to shine a light on some small subset of people. The issue for me is that there is no way to give a description of the list on the list itself. All you get is a name. So yes, folks will feel excluded much more easily if they feel like they fit the topic and aren't on the list, even if the intent of the list is to, say, only feature people for some specific reason. Even a 140 character description of the list would help.

For me, though, the bigger issue with the current rollout of Twitter lists is that it just doesn't mesh with how I've found I use Twitter: I like to follow conversations or topics and not just groups of people. I use the search function of Tweetdeck, for example, to set up a column on a word, words, or hashtag rather than grouping people who may, or may not, be talking about the topic I'm interested in. Most importantly, this way I get to hear new voices all the time. And to me, that's one of the best things about Twitter....

As someone who is never on anyone's lists about anything - good, bad or indifferent - I think we have to become reasonably philosophical about this. Most of us are only really known to a small handful of people on the web in relative terms - much as in real life our social circles do not usually consist of thousands of people - so maybe we should just choose to follow lists that seems relevant or interesting to us either personally or for our work and continue to cultivate and maybe extend our own little social circles online without wondering if we are hip, trendy or popular enough to be followed or listed?

I agree Chris, no one likes to be left out or even feel that way, even if isn't the case. Although I do think Twitter is trying to help us organize our followers. I use lists in seesmic, maybe twitter should not publicize if we are on a list or not and keep it more of a private element in your twitter account. For my eyes only?

I'm not using Tweetdeck so the lists function came in handy for me. The first thing I did was to create a list called my-web-A-list, basically the people whose tweets resonate more with me and with whom I've had some kind of contact (through email, DM, etc). Then I thought, what about those that browse through it and find out they are not there? That is when, at least for the time being, I decided to make my lists private. I know it defeats the purpose of social media being social, but I'm using lists primarily as a way to keep my Twitter contacts organized. Having said that, I don't think lists are a bad idea. For example, they let you more or less know who has been able to get their followers organically and who may have done it with an automated script. Also, I think it is a good way to find relevant people to follow. For example, I'm perusing other Tweeterers' lists to find people in my city.

ya, I haven't decided yet what I'm going to do about the lists. I'm with you, I don't want someone that I actually care about to feel upset and I certainly wouldn't want to think I was not as important because I wasn't in a list that I thought I should or would be in.

I look forward to seeing where this leads

I agree. The private use of these seems pretty useful, as you have described.

Not sure how well the public lists will work for people, especially if someone was to leave out a client or a friend. People are very touchy.

Chris, judging from the wide-ranging comments to your post about Twitter lists, you have hit a button for many. I'm curious too about the difference of Twitter lists from the same type of functionality I have found on TweetDeck for many months. My contacts are divided into manageable categories (e.g., social-media; marketing; pr; Cincy; first-tier) and the system has been working just fine. I'm not all that sure yet that the new Twitter feature serves any better purpose except for others' ability to now 'observe' what I am doing or 'hmmmm' how popular my account is by 'someone's' standards.

I sent out a tweet this morning in fact to the possible social media trend toward exclusivity (e.g., the recent 'birth' of both Twitter Lists as well as the have's and have-not's for Google Wave invites.)

Here's the Tweet:
@JoanneMaly: Hoping soc med doesn't bec. new gotta-B-in-this-exclusive-clique-type-of-thing (e.g. GgleWve invites/TwttrLsts)

Excluding people is not comfortable for anyone - true.

But there will always be lists of some sort - have you not, yourself, been listed in a kabillion blog posts about the Top N Bloggers or such, where N is a terribly terribly small select group? - whether or not Twitter enables it. List-making is human nature, and many of us have long had a little notepad or even a spreadsheet in action.

Where I have to strongly disagree with you is in your statement that lists are static.

Au contraire, lists are capable of constant evolution to reflect the changing realities of Twitter. Not merely in the adding and subtracting of users, but in renaming and resorting, and shifting between public and private. And if Twitter adds the ability to merge and/or subdivide lists (as I hope it will do), down the road, there's a whole other world of list evolution waiting to happen! Add to that, the migration of Twitter lists to RSS to endless mashups and aggregations - not to begin to speculate on the possibilities once the API is wrestled into submission by the apps-makers!

Follow-and-list, follow-but-don't-list, don't-follow-but-do-list, don't follow-and-don't-list are other variations that make it much more complex. And we're not one-dimensional people, any of us - some one person could fit just as neatly into half a dozen lists, but is unlikely to be listed in them all, just for practical reasons!

... but yes, some people will feel left out.
Inevitably.

So I do think that for someone with your high profile - a public figure, really - it's probably kinder that you've decided to opt for private lists.

For the rest of us, however, I have to wonder how much people really care if they "make" our lists or not.

That said, two-thirds of my lists are private,and I value those individuals as much if not more. Different lists, different roles. And if anyone does feel slightly by not appearing on my public lists, I hope that they will assume - quite likely correctly - that they do appear on a private list.

Sorry for the long comment here - probably should have just written a blog post, eh? :)

I think I agree, Chris. Twitter already has cliques. Lists may make cliques even more exclusive. They can be useful if done properly but I think lists may be used as much to purposefully exclude as to include. And personal lists aren't the answer. They create a sense of exclusion and mystery to anyone who is not on them.

Doug

The good thing about the lists is you can make them private. This means I can make a list of the people I really want to keep tabs on, and that info isn't broadcast to the Twitterverse. This makes the lists very similar to grouping friends on Facebook.

If it weren't for the public/private option, I probably wouldn't like the lists, either. With it? I think they're fine.

Chris, one more good thing about the lists... You can add someone to a list without following them from your main account. This means you can put company and news feeds that you only want to check periodically into a bucket so that the regular updates don't clog up your main feed. That's a pretty decent feature.

Chris: you are totally wrong about this. But you did motivate me to write a blog post about it. http://scobleizer.com/2009/10/31/twitters-lists... So, it's not all bad. :-)

Chris, I can kind of agree with your point. Actually, I am personally making almost all my lists private, because I am primarily using those lists as a way to organize my followers. I have tweet deck and hootsuite, but I just find the lists an easier way to do the organizing. The ultimate goal is to be able to better interact and build relationships through Twitter, which is why I am on Twitter in the first pace.

I can see your point on this issue. Lists can be exclusionary when a list is made that references 'the coolest ppl on twitter' or 'the best designers'. And that is probably not the best way to use lists.

However, if there are some great ways to use lists. I personally made a list of all the twitterkids I taught so I can reference people to one list. I saw someone else make a list of people they have met in real life.

So although I don't think that lists are a terrible invention I do see how they can be exclusionary.

I understand your dilema. You are a well respected man who's developed fabulous online and offline influence, thus your concern over who might "miss" during your list twitter building efforts is valid (This reaction is normal.) However, I'd like to encourage you to shuck those feelings and go for it anyway as it's more important for you to share what you know than to be worried about the possible negative affects of your lists. That same risk applies with who you follow / don't follow.

Twitter lists reveal the following:

* what you value / your interests
* how you perceive / classify your friends / connections
* how you are perceived / classified (others' lists you are mentioned on) - influence!
* how many folks FOLLOW your lists (this shows your lists are valued) - more influence!
* how many folks mention / refer to your lists - even more influence!

All in all, this list feature, shows true influencial power. This will distinguish everyone. Lists are like endorsements. I call it the new "LIST ECONOMY". Influence just took a hard right turn. You still on the bus? :)

Now, go make your lists! We're looking to learn from you.
Cheers,

@SusanBeebe
PS. Looking forward to seeing you at SM2day Conference in Rochester on Nov 11 (I am a panelist at that conference).
@SMC_Rochester - Co-Founder

Chris, spend some more time with the lists and reconsider later.

Do you not like lists just so you can write a blog about it? Seems weird to me. They are just TWITTER lists. No ones life should depend upon being on a twitter list.

Lists, for me, are simply a way to categorize and simplify. I can pay more attention to one list or another depending on what my interests or needs are on any given day. I may not have time to look at my friends list on a busy day when I'm also engaging in industry discussion that is important to my professional life.

Twitter lists will definitely be used in "mean" ways. Lots of things can be used to exclude. We live with that every day. I will be sad to see people excluded. However, there has to be a way to use Twitter itself (and not necessarily a 3rd party app) to enable us to sort and communicate with the people we really want or need to at any given time or, for businesses to keep an eye on what the employees or clients are saying. So, lists may help with reputation management too.

We all have the choice to make our lists private. That won't make anyone feel excluded at all.

Chris,
Thanks so much for articulating this. Lists are going to be a game-changer and maybe not in a community-building way.
I have a simple fix that could help. Leave the lists but eliminate the "listed" metric so that people don't focus on how many lists a given tweeter is on. I like the idea of getting recommendations from you but don't really need to know how many people have included you in a list.
What was surprising about the list rollout was how quickly everyone became The Academy and/or Best Actor. I got a queasy feeling seeing how quickly a community based on creating relationships and sharing value quickly starting judging and rating each other and creating "A-listers" and "Top" and "Best" lists. And I got equally queasy with all the bragging ("Gosh, just noticed that I'm already on a gazillion lists!)
I created a few lists because it is helpful to be able to jump to just Gov 2.0 feeds or just wine tweeters if that is what I am interested in in that moment and the interface is better than tweetdeck groups. And I am going to continue creating a very thorough list of everyone I follow who lives in NYC (mainly to find the good tweetups!). But I've already made two lists private because I just didn't feel comfortable to say who I thought was "most interesting", and I think I may take most of the others private as well.
It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

Sorting is a big deal - especially when you've got a massive collection. Lots of Twitter desktop applications do this - for example, TweetDeck has internal lists, I've got half a dozen easy. But do I want to display this stuff for the world to see? Probably not.

It could be used as a suggestions segments - new people to follow, sort of like #followfriday, if you please. They could also be used like tag - people I know who blog, for example, or people who podcast. It's exclusive, yes, but it's pragmatic in its exclusion - if you feel left out looking at a podcaster's list, but you don't podcast, how relevant is this to YOU the viewer, after all?

I agree with you, there are a lot of invisible uses for this. But the cool/uncool factor will have to wear off before this begins to happen.

What a lively discussion. I think Liz McLellan's quote
"I learned living in New York City, that if I took time to be down about parties I was not invited to, I wouldn't enjoy the parties I was free to throw." would go on my fave T-shirt if it weren't so long.

I've spent a day with the lists, made a few, and my bone of contention is, to be done to my satisfaction, they require a large time commitment. There WILL be someone left out, someone who should be there. That's just how it is. I could make a great list about hockey today, some hockey guru could join tomorrow and be off my radar, rendering my list incomplete, although I may not know it.

However, that does not make them useless or exclusionary in my eyes. In fact, the sheer volume of them makes them something of an equalizer. Now, instead of a Nielsen list once a year or a "50 Most Whatever Whatever" people every 5 month, or gawd help me, a "Hot Blogger" anything, we have a constant influx of new lists based on people's subjective criteria. Which, frankly, is what all lists have always been based on anyway, Nielsen can say what they want about their metrics. Whatev. People make lists. And, as my favorite statistics prof always said, "Numbers say what you want them to."

But if I were you, would my lists be public? He**s no. Just more blanks to be shot, when you're not trying to be a target. Not a good use of time.

You're on my Cool Dad list, tho.:)

HA! - well maybe you just need a bigger t-shirt!

I think to, in general its a good idea when explaining things to yourself - As in why am I not on that list? To go for the least painful explanation. Chances are it has zero to do with you. I think much of the pain we experience is pain that comes from explaining things to ourselves in the most personally painful ways, when more often than not the most likely story has nothing to do with you or what you have to offer. Also - once you become yourself, trully, openly - you are guaranteed to find out that you are not everyone's cup a tea. And you will also find your true blue friends. Can't do that without the full monty.

That said if there's any doubt, try to always provide signal and failing that, laughs...preferrably - both!

Makes me think of my faith. Believing something so much, and wanting everyone to understand it (like you do with what you write). But not everyone's going to dig it, and some will even hate that you bring it up.

But at some point you have to stand for something, and can't expect to please everyone. Stepping on toes is a big priority if you want to be influential. Just a choice whether you want to influence the world, or just those that agree with your view.

Do you recall how I met you?
You had this really awesome idea that would help new users - Twitter Packs. I railed and ranted and posted against it. It was exclusionary and contrary to the open and non-elite nature of Twitter!! Oh, and I mistakenly thought it was sexist...(word choice, I admitted I was wrong.) This was back in 2007, right?

I'm glad you and I are on the same page now. At least with your wiki idea anyone could edit a list/pack... now? Now we've got a whole new game for people to play thanks to Twitter.

I will never really understand why people think that it's okay to make other people feel crappy and left out simply because they don't care whether or not someone leaves them out.

The justification I keep hearing for why it's okay to make people feel that way? That they shouldn't.

Let's start acknowledging the reality versus the ideals. If everyone you know was invited to a party but you weren't - it feels like crap. You aren't going to go to the host and say "hey... um, you left me off the invite list... was that a mistake or not?" unless you have a cast-iron self image or reason to believe the former.

Public lists are not the same as private filtering views.

Honestly? I was making some lists - but I've just realized that I'm probably going to post about this tomorrow as I delete them all.

Thanks for stepping up to bat Chris. And thanks for making me realize that yeah, I really AM against them.

addendum:

Someone else (whom I won't name b/c it was a DM) just mentioned to me the fact that subjectivity plays a huge part in lists that cause issues.

Let's say I was making a list of "Social Media Thought Leaders" but (strictly hypothetically) I couldn't stand you Chris, or I always disagreed with your viewpoints. Am I likely to put you on the list because I know that you are, in fact, one of those leaders despite the fact that I don't want to follow or endorse you?

Lists are going to prove to be a bigger negative than a positive in the long run.

There are "shoulds" -- people *should* use lists to enlighten other users, they *should* not be offended or hurt if they are left off of a list... and there are realities -- people will use lists to manipulate, game the system, increase their perceived influence, troll, malign others and people will be offended and hurt if they feel left out by someone whom they care for or respect.

Yeah but if Chris is on 50 lists - a collective filtering is going on, and I say perhaps I am new to the subject, can be fairly sure Chris is providing valuable insight on a regular basis. That's very useful to me.

I'm not going to take one individual's assessment of another as my sole input. We don't do that in life, why would we do that in this case?

There will always be people who will use the systems we create to add static - We need to get smart about filtering it. Killing features that can be used wisely or stupidly, or aggressively is not the way.

You can't socially engineer shitty behavior off the internet. It's an ideal, but as a rule, it ends up restricting the freedom of the well behaved and thoughtful to control the nasty and the immature.

The nasty and the immature will always find a way to plop a turd in the punch bowl. It's a human problem not a technical one.

OK Im partially wrong here.. comment rating allows trolls to be hidden.. so yeah sometimes there are technical fixes... but generally I think my point stands...

I outlined it more thoroughly in my own post today, but as to how the Lists can be scammed more easily than even following? Only if you're willing to go through and see if 1) the lists are all by different accounts and 2) they are all positive lists (is Chris on 50 good lists or 50 negative lists? or maybe 25 of each?) then will it be useful. Putting the number on peoples' profiles indicates it's a metric when it really isn't.

GeekMommy - unless you pay attention to the people you pay attention to for a reason. And yes, any system can be gamed...so it wouldn't be my only metric!

Hey! Did you know that you are following me? Isn't that the same as being unlisted?

a very well made point!

I see the list making ability and it looks like too much work.

Dr. Letitia Wright
The Wright Place TV Show
http://wrightplacetv.com
www.twitter.com/drwright1

Hence this is why I tweeted earlier that the Twitter lists remind me of the Myspace "Top 8" from back in the day. People always felt left out and excluded if not on the Top 8 and if they made it on there wondered by others where ahead of them in the order.

Keep the posts coming! Love your insights!

-Melodie
@MyMelodie

Haven't worked on any lists for myself except my 'horse people' list as I want to read more about how others are using them. I see great value and use for the lists, but my list of available Cowboys will be a Private List!!