Comments on: Twitter: Frequently cited URLs, Part 2 http://www.nickarnett.net/2009/01/01/twitter-frequently-cited-urls-part-2/ Social media analytics for decision-making Sat, 06 Feb 2010 21:53:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Nick Arnett http://www.nickarnett.net/2009/01/01/twitter-frequently-cited-urls-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-514 Nick Arnett Sun, 08 Feb 2009 15:11:11 +0000 http://www.nickarnett.net/?p=142#comment-514 See http://TwURLedNews.com See http://TwURLedNews.com

]]> By: web analytics and smo http://www.nickarnett.net/2009/01/01/twitter-frequently-cited-urls-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-512 web analytics and smo Sun, 08 Feb 2009 03:14:49 +0000 http://www.nickarnett.net/?p=142#comment-512 So how are you guys exactly using and applying this info? Please give some example. Thank you! So how are you guys exactly using and applying this info? Please give some example. Thank you!

]]> By: Nick Arnett http://www.nickarnett.net/2009/01/01/twitter-frequently-cited-urls-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-44 Nick Arnett Fri, 02 Jan 2009 20:42:12 +0000 http://www.nickarnett.net/?p=142#comment-44 Okay, that's pretty much what I've done in other social network analysis, with some tweaks. That's where I'm headed with this, with the added twist of trying to do it within the Twitter API limitations, which means the exploration has to be pretty smart. The main bit I'll add is that everybody gets some credit for re-posting a URL, since there really is no way to know (and it is quite unlikely) that all of the later ones were influenced by the first person. Basically, the more people who post a URL after you, the more influence (or perception) you are likely to have. Those who consistently score high this way are interesting people, even if they never or rarely are the very first. Okay, that’s pretty much what I’ve done in other social network analysis, with some tweaks. That’s where I’m headed with this, with the added twist of trying to do it within the Twitter API limitations, which means the exploration has to be pretty smart.

The main bit I’ll add is that everybody gets some credit for re-posting a URL, since there really is no way to know (and it is quite unlikely) that all of the later ones were influenced by the first person. Basically, the more people who post a URL after you, the more influence (or perception) you are likely to have. Those who consistently score high this way are interesting people, even if they never or rarely are the very first.

]]> By: Xavier http://www.nickarnett.net/2009/01/01/twitter-frequently-cited-urls-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-43 Xavier Fri, 02 Jan 2009 20:34:35 +0000 http://www.nickarnett.net/?p=142#comment-43 I have been thinking that there should be a way to find the "rolling" top 50 most posted urls on twitter, then look at that list and remove any "retweets" and then look at the results based on time of post. with the firts post being labeld the "prime mover", then I thought that somehow someone should take that list of primemovers and track it over time and cross reference it with the "retweet" list. This seemed to me to be a way ate trending influence. Taking this data and viewing against rrw or dig would be a good idea too. Maybe this is already being done, maybe its not the right way to get to influence. I have been thinking that there should be a way to find the “rolling” top 50 most posted urls on twitter, then look at that list and remove any “retweets” and then look at the results based on time of post. with the firts post being labeld the “prime mover”, then I thought that somehow someone should take that list of primemovers and track it over time and cross reference it with the “retweet” list. This seemed to me to be a way ate trending influence. Taking this data and viewing against rrw or dig would be a good idea too. Maybe this is already being done, maybe its not the right way to get to influence.

]]> By: Nick Arnett http://www.nickarnett.net/2009/01/01/twitter-frequently-cited-urls-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-42 Nick Arnett Fri, 02 Jan 2009 20:23:22 +0000 http://www.nickarnett.net/?p=142#comment-42 I'm being careful about using the word "influence." Some people who seem to be influencers may really just be people who see trends first - they are perceptive, but not necessarily influential (though the two often go together). In any case, the distinction may not be that important for most purposes. What do you mean by the "daily top unique url’s by member" that's different from what I'm doing? I’m being careful about using the word “influence.” Some people who seem to be influencers may really just be people who see trends first – they are perceptive, but not necessarily influential (though the two often go together). In any case, the distinction may not be that important for most purposes.

What do you mean by the “daily top unique url’s by member” that’s different from what I’m doing?

]]> By: Xavier http://www.nickarnett.net/2009/01/01/twitter-frequently-cited-urls-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-41 Xavier Fri, 02 Jan 2009 20:18:46 +0000 http://www.nickarnett.net/?p=142#comment-41 nick, this is pretty cool, what I'd like to try and figure out is a way to track and trend top 50 cited "daily top unique url's by member" this would be a good way to get at a top influencer metric for twitter. X nick,

this is pretty cool, what I’d like to try and figure out is a way to track and trend top 50 cited “daily top unique url’s by member” this would be a good way to get at a top influencer metric for twitter.

X

]]>