So I guess I am a numbers jockey but not in the way (I think) you define it. I work to keep my “following” number _low_ and meaningful – to me, obviously. My criteria for following are public (at least two of these four) – original, informative, interesting and dialectic. Reciprocity is not one of them but I am glad to have conversations with you, Mr P and Ms Danicki often. And I ruthlessly block spammers, pornsters and marketers of products I have no interest in (cigarettes, I-can-make-you-rich, I-coach-you-to-eternal-happiness all fall in the same BS basket from my point of view). That keeps “follower” numbers low too.

That said, I find nothing wrong with people getting excited to reach a certain number of followers. @eatingLA – who is a real person, Pat Saperstein, whom I know in real life – actually was just thanking her followers. I don’t see what’s so objectionable about this. They’re enjoying it, good for them. Doesn’t necessarily make them number jockeys.

I’d rather have actual conversations (on Twitter and off Twitter) with three amazing people than be followed by one million. As it happens, I get to have conversations with a lot more than that. The follower obsessives can sit in the corner tugging away at their knobs – doesn’t bother me a bit as long as they keep their mess away from me.

In all seriousness, hilariously good stuff. I love it. How do people not get this?

I was intrigued to work out the percentage of followers I lost- it works out at 0.25% I think most of those would’ve been from when i started out and wasn’t as ruthless about blocking people. I’ve found that if you let some people follow they’ll contaminate my twitter stream- by following people I’m following/ are following me, and spamming them too!
I’m happy to have lost them.

Quality is always preferable to me than quantity, and medium to long term always pays way more.