To the best of my knowledge, the first social scoring mechanism that really caught on was tweet grader (formerly Twitter Grader). I never liked it. Of course, it was great if you had a higher number than the next guy, but how was your score determined? Was it game-able? Did it really tell you anything?
Last year, Klout started to become very popular. For the uninitiated, Klout is a sort of social scoring system that attempts to tell you how much real influence you have online, whether you’re a tastemaker or a listener or something else, and a number of other things. Now, I believe that Klout might be flawed, but is at least doing a lot of work toward making social scoring legitimately valuable.
BUT, how can I put stock in a system that is so obviously gameable?
My Klout score seems to hover just slightly north of 50.
And, I’m apparently a specialist.
Now, this guy:
He only posts fake retweets of my account. Take a look at my Twitter account and then his. I doubt you’ll see a single one of my tweets in his stream. Somehow, he has ~1,500 followers and is amazingly on 12 lists, but when we consider that 92% of Newt Gingrich’s Twitter followers are fake, we should perhaps not be surprised.
I’ve been watching this account for quite a while and have never once seen it respond to anyone. There’s no engagement. There’s no nothing except for spam retweets of me. So, I’m pretty sure this isn’t even a human, but rather just a bot…one of the main reasons that I do not feel bad calling it out.
Klout and other services might have a lot of great information, and actually, I think that Klout is really on to something with its Perks program, but ultimately, if it is supposed to show me who really has influence online, it’s going to have to clean up things like this before it’s worth paying any attention to.