<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Twitter Limits The Number of Users You Can Follow - Raises Storm in Blogosphere</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.watblog.com/2008/08/13/twitter-limits-number-of-followers-raises-storm/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.watblog.com/2008/08/13/twitter-limits-number-of-followers-raises-storm/</link>
	<description>The Refreshing Blog on Web, Advertising and Technology in India!</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:42:22 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: shalini</title>
		<link>http://www.watblog.com/2008/08/13/twitter-limits-number-of-followers-raises-storm/#comment-9946</link>
		<dc:creator>shalini</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 03:06:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.watblog.com/?p=4607#comment-9946</guid>
		<description>Spamming is such a huge problem. from a spammers point of view I dont understand the economics.
Surely it must cost him something in terms of time and money?
Most people recognize spam and have filters. So where is the effectiveness of spamming? Why do it?
Any clues?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Spamming is such a huge problem. from a spammers point of view I dont understand the economics.<br />
Surely it must cost him something in terms of time and money?<br />
Most people recognize spam and have filters. So where is the effectiveness of spamming? Why do it?<br />
Any clues?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ronak Shah</title>
		<link>http://www.watblog.com/2008/08/13/twitter-limits-number-of-followers-raises-storm/#comment-9788</link>
		<dc:creator>Ronak Shah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 10:55:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.watblog.com/?p=4607#comment-9788</guid>
		<description>Obsolete links meaning links that direct to a viagra sale or even to adult sites.

Even links which are mainly advertisements or refer to direct sales.

Twitter has to be clean and not like-a-sales-person-tring-tring-tring-tring strategy.

What spammers mainly do is post ample of links that direct them to make money through twitter but what they sell is adult stuff mainly that sells like "hot cakes".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obsolete links meaning links that direct to a viagra sale or even to adult sites.</p>
<p>Even links which are mainly advertisements or refer to direct sales.</p>
<p>Twitter has to be clean and not like-a-sales-person-tring-tring-tring-tring strategy.</p>
<p>What spammers mainly do is post ample of links that direct them to make money through twitter but what they sell is adult stuff mainly that sells like &#8220;hot cakes&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shāyon</title>
		<link>http://www.watblog.com/2008/08/13/twitter-limits-number-of-followers-raises-storm/#comment-9785</link>
		<dc:creator>Shāyon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:24:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.watblog.com/?p=4607#comment-9785</guid>
		<description>Hi Ronak,

I think your idea of rating system sounds good. The rating could also emulate the system on Technorati where the person who rates matters too. 

As for spammers, I really cannot see how they might be affecting / annoying other users. All one needs to do is unfollow a spammer.

I do not agree to your suggestion of " they should ban those who send too many obsolete spam links on twitter" because how do you decide which link is obsolete and which one isn't? If, by 'obsolete', u mean dead links... then I fail to understand why would spammers broadcast dead links, in the first place?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Ronak,</p>
<p>I think your idea of rating system sounds good. The rating could also emulate the system on Technorati where the person who rates matters too. </p>
<p>As for spammers, I really cannot see how they might be affecting / annoying other users. All one needs to do is unfollow a spammer.</p>
<p>I do not agree to your suggestion of &#8221; they should ban those who send too many obsolete spam links on twitter&#8221; because how do you decide which link is obsolete and which one isn&#8217;t? If, by &#8216;obsolete&#8217;, u mean dead links&#8230; then I fail to understand why would spammers broadcast dead links, in the first place?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ronak Shah</title>
		<link>http://www.watblog.com/2008/08/13/twitter-limits-number-of-followers-raises-storm/#comment-9783</link>
		<dc:creator>Ronak Shah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.watblog.com/?p=4607#comment-9783</guid>
		<description>Shayon,

I simply think, twitter should introduce a rating system.

If it wants to ban spammers, it should set rules for all its users.

Moresoever, they should ban those who send too many obsolete spam links on twitter. 

Twitter is a place where you can get popular if you know how to do just that. That's one of the many reasons why people get hooked to twitter. ;-) Apart from meeting new people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shayon,</p>
<p>I simply think, twitter should introduce a rating system.</p>
<p>If it wants to ban spammers, it should set rules for all its users.</p>
<p>Moresoever, they should ban those who send too many obsolete spam links on twitter. </p>
<p>Twitter is a place where you can get popular if you know how to do just that. That&#8217;s one of the many reasons why people get hooked to twitter. <img src='http://www.watblog.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> Apart from meeting new people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
