Twitter Lists- Im Not Down

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.There are variety of the technologies being seen in the Twitter and certain add-ons.
vitamine e

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.I am not following and follow them. I also look at list of people as I am really interested in and see who I am missing and I should be following.

weight loss pills

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.)

jeux video

I am twitter lover. Really nice post about twitter. It is really good. You always shared something new and amazing information. Thanks for that.

christmas gifts

Thoughtful, link-rich and insightful post. I question whether others assigning us to lists causes us to "self censor" any more than we do already, living as we do in real-time, passing snippets of text, images and video from one to another.
This I do know to be true: As my followers grew from 6 to 60 to 600 to over 6000, I became more aware of the possibilities for mistakes, whether textual or factual, to reflect poorly upon my professional or personal life. Living so transparently in the public eye holds that possibility for all now.Do the labels of others now mean that we all have to conform to those boundaries? I'm not so sure.Increasingly, we define ourselves by what we talk about, who we connect to and what we consume. Like, say, CJR.
Multivitamins

I'm experimenting with lists myself. On the one hand it seems limiting to have to put people in groups but sometimes there is something to be gained from structure.

Or looked at another way, being included in someones public list could expose you to even more people and looking at other peoples lists could expose you to other great people to follow. But we're talking about exclusion. Should you be upset that not everyone that you follow follows you back? Same problem really, just a different format. All of this goes back to not being obsessed with the numbers. If I have done enough to peek your interest to put me on a list, God bless you and I thank you. If not, it's ok, I'll keep on keeping on. Get over the ego gratification, do what you do as best as you can and generally good things will follow.

I see your point... but think it as a second best solution to the clutter of people...

I just tried the lists and I'm liking it. I only follow aroudn 700 people, and far less than that are actually active. So the lists allow me to group people. If I'm interested in reading about business, I have the social media list. If I want to laugh, I have some very funny people I follow. If I'm sewing on a quilt, I can check out what the quilters are doing. Just love it!

Take Facebook for example, I like that I can create multiple lists and segment my audience to make it easier to filter through people's content. This works well when I want to check in with say my "Clients" list to see what they're up to or when I want to check in with old "College Friends" or check in with people in my "People to Meet" list before a conference. Being able to filter through content in this way is great. What's great too is that people don't know that they belong to one list or another. Not that I'm trying to be cruel or deceitful or anything. List making just makes it easier for me to filter through content and that's a good thing.

Here though (on Twitter), I think it kinda sucks that lists are public for all to see because it excludes people and well, it does suck to feel left out. Like you, I'll use private lists this way no one feels left out. Then again, I don't have thousands upon thousands of followers so it's a little easier for me to filter through content...

i made a graphic that shares this sentiment - Twitter Lists Demystified http://bit.ly/31sXJK

Chris, this is a great post and points out some things that online relationships can be just as petty as real ones.

I started a list called "awesomesauce". I like that word. I started adding people I really liked to it. Probably most people that post here are on that list. But then I got to thinking "hmmm, person A is on this list, but their friend person B isn't because I just don't like person B, so is person A going to get all pissed off?".

So I just made the damn list private.

I can't wait until twitter list privacy breaks. Won't that be a fun day.

I'm neutral to the feature. Like anything new and disruptive in social media, there will be people to embrace it and support it and people to are hesitant and resistant. It will depend on the value people generally capture from it.

I do have a nagging feeling that it, too, will yet be another metric that will be gamed on Twitter. Though, not easily, it can still be gamed. Look at @mashable v. @barackobama to see what I mean.

Lists are merely another form of engagement, recommendation, respect and validation. Let's not inflate the impact of this too much. If you're a good person, you'll likely land on many people's lists. If you suck, you won't land on many people's lists.

~Joe

Yeah, I'm not sure what I think about the lists. I can see where there could be value, but overall it seems to add even more confusion to an already too busy "playground".

I certainly agree that it can exclude many users and become another popularity contest (how many lists are you on?). Lists don't necessarily translate to influence, just as followers do not.

As I said on Twitter.... Twitter lists = noisy, uberfilter, narcissistic^2, streamlined, repetitive, notable...all in one. (IMHO)

You make a good point but the flip side of exclusion is that Twitter Lists also enable more powerful "inclusion". As I've been looking at Lists and thinking about what they mean for our small business platform, my mind chained back to a post a couple of months ago about all business starting with community - http://bit.ly/14DMhC.

I think that one of the cool potential uses of Lists by small businesses surrounds the online instantiation of their recommendations of other people and businesses in their community. As long as it's kept authentic, it could be very powerful indeed.

Ultimately we'll need to find a balancing act between unfiltered, totally open flow of information that is all inclusive vs. the filtered views, exclusion, and inferred authority that Twitter Lists will provide.

This has been one of the two main reasons I haven't made many lists yet (the other being the time it takes to make them). Right now, the only lists I made have been very specific to certain projects. The larger your scope, the more likely you may leave someone out who will be offended, even if the omission was simply an oversight.

Chris-- The ultimate relevance of lists won't be for people to feel included or excluded as experts on a given topic.

Twitter has a way now to organize Authority on the internet based on something other than pagerank... think about it: people will get authority on a subject based not on relevant/authoritative links to their sites, but by their presence on lists described by tags/keywords.

I hope this doesn't seem spammy, but I elaborate here, on how Twitter Lists can kill Google http://www.digitalmediaminute.com/article/4944/...

Hmm, quite a discussion you provoked, Chris. I tend to feel that lists based on numbers are 'safe' (or at least 'safer'), but lists based on opinions will always be debatable and left up to the opinion-maker's sole discretion.

Maybe opinionated lists are better if private, but soon some will leak and in the end, everyone loves a good debate!

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 agree with you 100%! Thought the same thing myself. :-)

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)

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.

On one hand, I totally agree. I'll admit that I've perused some of my friends' lists and been a little disappointed that I didn't "make the cut."

On the other hand, I've noticed a recent uptick in the number of followers I've attracted lately. A lot of them are fellow Mainers, and I suspect my profile has shown up on a bunch of Maine-oriented lists, and that led them to me. I found some new people to follow because they were on a "Maine Digital Creatives" list. I think a lot of people overlook the ability for lists to aid in friend discovery, and that has to be a good thing, right?

I just started playing with lists..no one should assume anything about how I think or feel about them based on where I am at with the feature. None of my lists are even remotely comprehensive of 'the cut' -- Its not a valid - forever data point - to worry about.

I've been using Tweetdeck for some time, and it allows you to make categorical lists, but only you know what those lists are.

Chris,

Perhaps it's people who might consider that lists don't mean anything other than how someone organizes. It has nothing to do with how popular someone is (which should be the least of their concern anyway).

Ergo, it's not the lists that will make people feel left out, it would only be the emphasis of importance of being on lists by people like yourself (thank goodness you don't do that). Or, more specifically and accurately, only people can make themselves feel left out.

Besides, in some ways, Tweetdeck (which I used briefly and then abandoned) was a tool that did the same thing, with the only difference being that those lists did exclude people and those excluded never knew it and didn't have the opportunity to feel left out.

Is that better despite being the opposite of transparent? I don't really think so.

All my best,
Rich

I've tried to give my lists a positive & helpful slant eg "tweepswholistedme", "greatappsandservices", "businesscoaches" and "awesomeaussies", so the focus is more about INclusion rather than EXclusion! :)

The problem with lists is not that you're not on them.

It's that you know when you're not on them.

This is a Twitter bug, and a real problem. Lists should be known only to the person making them. Doing otherwise causes more problems than it solves.

That doesn't make any sense. The value of lists is in sharing them!

I hope you're being sarcastic.

Not at all. Check out Scoble's for example: http://twitter.com/scobleizer/lists . The value is in them being public. Making them private would be idiotic.

LOL.

The value in a list is to be able to organize. That's pretty much why lists were invented. They've been bastardized by the media who wants you to believe there are seven, and only seven, ways to fight fat, but lists are a system of organization. Sharing is an extra.

But on your (Scoble's?) premise - sure, send your list to friends who you think could use that information.

But people on the lists should never have to know they're on a list. I should never get a ping or have a page on my site that says "You're on pwb's Cool People list." There's not much value to that but simple vanity.

100% disagree. The main value of lists is in sharing and discovery. Getting pinged when your listed is no different than when you're followed. Other tools can provide personal organization but Twitter is in the best position to facilitate the sharing and discovery. I can't even believe there is a question about this.

Are Twitter Lists any different from Groups or Userlists on Tweetdeck and Seesmic? Or a blogroll? Or credits in a book? Or loyalties to brands and products?

They're simply the decision of a person, and a personal choice. Some folks will like them, some not, but I agree with much of the commentary here that in the grand scheme of things, being on a Twitter list (or not) shouldn't be something to get worked up about.

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!

Thank you for posting this, Chris. I feel the same way and it helps when someone like you says it. You're never too grown up to have your feelings hurt.

Here's another way to look at it Chris. You have a lovely kid! Your beloved child will notice in some contexts - let's say MySpace or FB -- That some kids have more friends than others.

I hope that if she comes to you, feeling hurt, you will have something to say to her that will strengthen her self love and self esteem in the face of that inevitability... (Of course I don't mean to imply that your kid won't be the most awesome and most friended child in the history of the world..Because as YOU certainly know best, she is awesome whether she is on those other kids friends lists or not. )

Its more important to her development that she continues to pursue what ever interests her, rather than what she thinks will get her more FB friends...right? I mean as all young nerds will tell you middle school....well shiver....

As adults we can plan all kinds of activities that will hopefully lessen the crucible that is middle school, make it more inclusive, teach our children to teach other people's children with compassion and respect... We don't seem any where near reaching critical mass on this project though...

Proving, once again, that life is just like high school, no matter how "mature" we all get. You are the man, my friend.

I'm okay with Twitter Lists, but I doubt they will be of much value to me personally. I am sure that I will use them from time to time to sort, or find groups of Tweople, but as far as them boosting my Twitter ranking, or elevating my online status... not gonna happen unless I go viral for something.

Just another twitter option to tinker with, and will bring forth a hundred new twitter third party sites.

Oh, brother. What a ridiculous feeling and post.

Luckily, you helped out with your thoughtful comment.

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?

Yawn.

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...

Agreed.

I can see where you'd have a problem with individuals. I do however like the list feature as I can (for example) create a list of "news" feeds and aggregate them to 1 list, and not actually follow any of them. That way, if I'm using twitter.com or tweetie on the iPhone, I'm not going to have to sift through a bunch of tweets of news just to do a quick read.

Lists, are the latest in internet popularity contest. I suspect once the fad of making top X lists passes it'll be like the IM feature, unused, hard to maintain and not worth it.

I completely agree with Chris. I'm don't care to make lists, nor care if I'm on them.

Lists feel like one of those things people need to feel important. Whether making a list people talk about, or being on a list that people covet. Does either really mean you're more important? more cool? Hip?

Not really, not to me.

I'll continue to ignore lists, and those who make them, or celebrate their being on them.

I think a better idea than lists, would have been netflix style suggestions. based on tweets, common followers, followees, etc. Much less elitist and exclusionary, and based on an algorithm.

With well over 100K followers, I'm not sure why anyone would expect u to remember/categorize every person. I don't have many follower and I can't do it. I started my lists knowing that I would be adding to them as I remembered or made a new connection.

I'm actually surprised that you would choose not to use the feature because of this. Is there another reason? IMO if people want to be on a list, they should focus more on building stronger connections.

BTW, your newsletter is awesome and easily in my Top 5 right now! :)

I'm a little iffy on lists, too. You're right. They can be exclusionary and people who don't make the list might get their feelings hurt. On the other hand, if you include people on a list, they may feel a dense of gratitude ("Hey, I'm important to this guy") and enter into a new sense of engagement (this is really a guess, at this point).

I've also seen where some folks are on lists in the triple (or even quadruple) digits while I may only be listed in the single digit or lower double digits. Gee, that doesn't make me feel very special or loved.

The one other thing about lists is the "follow this list" feature. I may or may not want to follow the list and the person creating the list may or may not want others to know that some of their followers have been categorized. It can get sticky.

There are some benefits. I can follow a thread of people with different interests and different backgrounds. All that said, the web version of Twitter is still pretty clunky and Tweetdeck has provided a grouping feature forever.

I see nothing wrong with keeping your Twitter list private. I think that the lists will make it difficult for some "up and coming" people on Twitter because when you see their profile and that they have only been added to 1 or 2 lists, people may not even look to see how good their content is, but just decide not to follow or interact with them based upon that "popularity" the list makes.

Wow - lots of discussion here. I'm just looking at twitter lists as their version of groups in tools like tweetdeck... and my guess is that with their API for lists, tools like tweetdeck will start using twitter's now built-in way to do lists. Simple as that.

As far as the exclusionary thing... well, yeah, sure. Just like who I'm following is out there. Lists themselves won't be the issue ... until I end up on someone's "nerdy git" list :-)

Lists are just a new level of "following" .. right now, it's so much work to add tweeps, most of mine are less then 1% complete. Too early to get riled up over it.

I agree with what you say to a point - the wonderful thing about Twitter is that feeling of inclusion and that you can join in a conversation no matter if you were involved in the initial start of it and i htink that this is where Twitter lists may fall down.

However, they can be incredibly useful. At Edelman for example we have several lists where we can follow each other - there is a list of almost everyone in the UK, there is a list of just the UK digital, and there is a wider list of many people worldwide.

It is this sort of list where the most benefit can be drawn, rather than a "top ten marketing specialists" type of list which is essentially a small cog in a wider popularity contest and promotes exclusivity.

I've got private lists - partially because I don't always mention who my family are in public, and I like following them - and partially because I do have friends that freak out when they're not included in the stuff I'm doing - whatever it is. I don't do follow Fridays any more because of the perpetration of entitlement into every single conversation on twitter - i.e. people feel that just because we're friends, they are entitled to make me leverage what influence I have to support them. One of the things I noticed about that though is that people will complain loudest about this stuff are those that are only interested in what you can do for them, rather than the two way street social networking should be. Its sad though that tech that's supposed to support and make our lives more seamless, turns into a brawl about friendship so easily.

Because of this very reason, I have kept my Twitter lists private

Hey Chris,

You're cool dude. Thanks for having a heart buddy, but end of they are just lists...

Best,

A

There are always inherent weaknesses with lists, but there are also strengths. People are part of lists, whether they choose it themselves or somebody designates it for them. It could be an organization you're a part of, a community group or business.

For example, I'm working on a list of Butler University alumni and students on Twitter. The only people who feel excluded will be those who regret not attending Butler.

But hurt feelings? People need to grow up and remember that they are in fact just lists.

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!!

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

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

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

a very well made point!

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.

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!

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...

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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, 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.

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.

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

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? :)

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)

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

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.

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, 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?

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'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.

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 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.

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?