

0 Tweets, 12,207 Followers - scrrr
https://twitter.com/apple

======
pyrotechnick
url - tweets - followers - ratio

<http://twitter.com/adobe> \- 10,420 - 139,670 - 13.40

<http://twitter.com/apple> \- 0 - 12,207 - ∞

<http://twitter.com/facebook> \- 997 - 5,673,552 - 5,690.62

<http://twitter.com/google> \- 3,820 - 5,382,253 - 1,408.97

<http://twitter.com/hp> \- 17,318 - 162,246 - 9.37

<http://twitter.com/microsoft> \- 3,504 - 346,880 - 99.00

<http://twitter.com/mozilla> \- 2,044 - 9,943 - 4.86

<http://twitter.com/nokia> \- 15,533 - 351,303 - 22.62

<http://twitter.com/opera> \- 3,529 - 104,859 - 29.71

<http://twitter.com/samsung> \- 8,863 - 332,269 - 37.49

<http://twitter.com/twitter> \- 1,470 - 14,420,774 - 9,810.05

Excluding Apple, I'm not entirely sure what this measures.

Twitter-ness?

~~~
zegmas
it's called "social proof", instead of "Twitter-ness"

~~~
pyrotechnick
Does "social proof" generally account for gaming?

For instance, what if Microsoft chooses not to report spam accounts whilst
Apple does?

It would be very much related to the rate of retweets as this is primarily how
information traverses Twitter.

I think the formula is something like _trendiness - honesty_.

