[twitter-dev] Re: daily follow/unfollow/update limit

[Developer In London]

yes initially i thought the follow/update/unfollow/dm are all in the same
limits. but i can see now (
http://help.twitter.com/forums/10711/entries/15364) that the 1000 only
applies for Updates/dms not for follow/unfollow. That only requires a near
1:1 ratio. Some documentation on what the maximum follow limit is for any
specific account would be good to know. Eg an account with x followers can
follow maximum y in any specific day. This can ensure we stay within
twitter's guideline instead of keep hitting limit.

Thanks,

Nayeem

2009/7/2 Doug Williams 

> It initially seemed like you were asking about the update limit but now you
> are talking about following limits. Can you be more specific on the behavior
> you are seeing and why you feel it is an issue? We can argument the
> documentation to clear the confusion but I'm not following your exact
> problem.
>
> Thanks,
> Doug
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Dewald Pretorius  wrote:
>
>>
>> I have noticed the same thing, and there is no predictable pattern to
>> it.
>>
>> The API kicks back the limit exceeded message on numbers far below
>> 1,000.
>>
>> The same goes for DMs. I've seen a person being limited after 200 DMs
>> have been sent.
>>
>
>


-- 
cashflowclublondon.co.uk

  ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
   `6_ 6  )   `-.  ( ).`-.__.`)
   (_Y_.)'  ._   )  `._ `. ``-..-'
 _..`--'_..-_/  /--'_.' ,'
(il),-''  (li),'  ((!.-'
.

[twitter-dev] Re: daily follow/unfollow/update limit

[Developer In London]

It doesnt seem to be anything hourly. I do notice it seems to give a 'you
have reached your daily follow limit' after 500 follows on a new account. It
seems to go by the 500 number quite regularly... I initially thought this
might be a new unannounced limit for new accounts.

2009/7/2 Doug Williams 

> The limits have not changed. We enforce the limits within hour intervals.
> Could the behavior you witnessed be explained by this enforcement policy?
>
> Thanks,
> Doug
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Developer In London <
> ebilliona...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I saw on the API documentation the daily limit is 1000 per day. But it
>> seems its lower then that. Is it a %age based limit?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Nayeem
>>
>
>


-- 
cashflowclublondon.co.uk

  ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
   `6_ 6  )   `-.  ( ).`-.__.`)
   (_Y_.)'  ._   )  `._ `. ``-..-'
 _..`--'_..-_/  /--'_.' ,'
(il),-''  (li),'  ((!.-'
.

[twitter-dev] daily follow/unfollow/update limit

[Developer In London]

I saw on the API documentation the daily limit is 1000 per day. But it seems
its lower then that. Is it a %age based limit?

Thanks

Nayeem

[twitter-dev] Re: get all friend screen_names

[Developer In London]

why would you need the screen_names of all the friends? usually you can use
the twitterID for making any API calls

2009/6/18 sull 

>
> i actually started out using statuses/friends until i realized that it
> was only 100 results per call.
> then i would have to go into paging.  plus i didnt need the other data
> that is returned.
> so then i decided that their must be a more direct call to make.  i
> suppose not.
>
> so if i return to statuses/friends approach, i would have to determine
> how many pages of friends exist for that user so i can import all the
> friends.  it would have been helpful if in the data response, the
> total # of pages was listed as well.  but i cna calculate based on
> ###.
>
> any other thoughts?  is this what others are doing to get complete
> friends list?
>
> thanks.
>
> sull
>
> On Jun 17, 10:30 pm, Abraham Williams <4bra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > statuses/friends would probably be faster.
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 20:11, sull  wrote:
> >
> > > i found it odd that i cannot seem to get a simple API response with
> > > all of a user's friends screen_names, only user ids.  do i need to
> > > make a request from users/show after i do friends/ids ?  am i missing
> > > a direct call or more efficient method?
> >
> > > thanks.
> >
> > --
> > Abraham Williams | Community |http://web608.org
> > Hacker |http://abrah.am|http://twitter.com/abraham
> > Project |http://fireeagle.labs.poseurtech.com
> > This email is: [ ] blogable [x] ask first [ ] private.
>



-- 
cashflowclublondon.co.uk

  ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
   `6_ 6  )   `-.  ( ).`-.__.`)
   (_Y_.)'  ._   )  `._ `. ``-..-'
 _..`--'_..-_/  /--'_.' ,'
(il),-''  (li),'  ((!.-'
.

[twitter-dev] Re: Twitter Application Usage Guidelines, Please Read

[Developer In London]

I second that.

2009/6/10 Justyn Howard 

>  What are the chances that this new TOS will negate any of the hard work
> we’ve done up until this point? Can you give us an idea of what will be
> protected? It’s a little alarming to hear that Twitter might decide to
> reserve functionality that the developer network has built-on and enhanced
> in favor of internalizing as business assets. As there has been no TOS in
> place other than the general Twitter TOS, many of us have spent countless
> hours and $$ trying to build businesses around Twitter.
>
> Not trying to be an alarmist, just curious what this will ultimately mean
> for us?
>
> Justyn
>
>
> On 6/9/09 8:51 PM, "Doug Williams"  wrote:
>
> The API TOS is currently in development. It is taking longer than hoped as
> we are still exploring what we want to give to developers and what we want
> to protect as business assets. For now, make sure that you understand the
> general TOS we have in place.
>
> We do work with developers if they are willing to answer our attempts to
> reach out before shutting them off due to TOS violations. We also try to
> understand what developers are doing and how they may be heading against the
> grain before issuing whitelisting. Most developers are willing to work with
> us which is great and works out for everyone.
>
> Thanks,
> Doug
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Jesse Stay  wrote:
>
> Doug, where is the developer API TOS?  I think that's part of the problem -
> none of us are being required to enter into an agreement before
> developing, therefore we have no idea what we can and can't do with it.  I
> also don't think most of us even know where any such TOS is, if there is
> one.  I agree that the OAuth application process should make this a bit 
> easier to manage,
> and help developers know more about what they are getting into before
> starting their applications.
>
> Personally, I want to make sure I'm following the rules of the
> API.  I'd also prefer to know what I'm agreeing to before starting a business 
> on top of it.
>  I feel for the developers of the 2 mentioned apps because, *if* they are
> violating any TOS, they probably had no idea they were doing so before
> spending so much time developing it. (even if I disagree with the premise of
> those apps)
>
> @Jesse
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Doug Williams  wrote:
>
> Brant,
> Thank you for your concern. This is something that bothers us as well.
>
> Moving applications exclusively to OAuth-based authentication will
> certainly help in restricting applications that abuse the service. If you
> find a service that you think is violating our TOS, please email
> a...@twitter.com or send a message to @twitterapi and we can take a look.
> As you mentioned, Del is great but she is but one person. We do have an
> abuse team forming to help quickly identify which services are violating our
> TOS. All in all we have a lot of work to do so please do help where you can.
>
> Cheers,
> Doug
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Brant  wrote:
>
>
> This message will hopefully get back to the people who run Twitter API
> development and spam prevention.
>
> I noticed there are quite a few twitter applications that are
> developed to abuse the service and violate their TOS.  They do not
> hide what their purpose is, yet these applications remain active.  I
> contacted twitter.com/delbius   who heads
> Twitter Spam prevention and
> she said that they do revoke API access to abusive applications.  But
> I don't think they are taking an aggressive stance against them.
>
> Abusive Applications:
> http://www.huitter.com/mutuality/
> http://www.twollo.com/
>
> The combination of these two applications is for outright abuse of the
> service.  They have been around for several months and are known
> applications to abuse the service with.  To make matters worse,
> Twitter suspends accounts of the people who use these applications
> rather than targeting the root of the problem, the applications
> themselves.  (Sound counterproductive? RIAA uses a similar policy by
> going after end users.)
>
> I propose that applications need to be more closely scrutinized and
> can even be flagged as abusive by users. Instead of creating
> algorithms that detect abnormal user behavior, why not detect abnormal
> application behavior.
>
> Taking a stronger stance against gray area applications could reduce
> server load on Twitter (giving real applications faster response time)
> and reduce manpower to deal with spam prevention.
>
> I strongly encourage anyone who develops Twitter applications to send
> this link around.
>
> Thanks for reading,
> Brant
> twitter.com/BrantTedeschi 
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
cashflowclublondon.co.uk

  ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
   `6_ 6  )   `-.  ( ).`-.__.`)
   (_Y_.)'  ._   )  `._ `. ``-..-'
 _..`--'_..-_/  /--'_.'

[twitter-dev] Re: Enable ability to block apps via Twitter or the API

[Developer In London]

Sorry, but I still cant agree on why asking for a API key on the normal API
cannot solve this. A whole application can be banned/throttled/controlled
using the API key if needed this way. At present applications register and
gets API keys anyway, so all this will do is add an extra layer of
authentication on API calls.

I think this is more an obsession with OAuth. ;-)

Nayeem

2009/6/2 Doug Williams 

> Chad is correct. Until we have everyone pushed through a funnel where API
> keys are required or applications can be deduced (as with OAuth) we have no
> way of knowing which application actually sent an update or DM in some
> cases. Furthermore, we don't have the notion of tweet level spam reporting.
> Currently users are only able to flag accounts a spam through "@spam
> @username" or "d spam @username" updates.
> So, until we develop tools to deal with spam on a per tweet-basis and have
> every application going through a pipe that we can control, application
> blocking is not a valuable use of our resources.
> Thanks,
> Doug
> --
>
> Doug Williams
> Twitter Platform Support
> http://twitter.com/dougw
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Chad Etzel  wrote:
>
>>
>> No, it can't be required.  Worse yet, it can be spoofed w/ basic auth,
>> so a "blocked" app could just change it's source parameter and appear
>> as something like TweetDeck.
>>
>> -Chad
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Developer In London
>>  wrote:
>> > Couldnt the app-id be made a required parameter for the API calls? That
>> way
>> > it can still work with basic auth.
>> >
>> > 2009/6/2 Doug Williams 
>> >>
>> >> Floated the idea. Until we funnel everyone through OAuth (that means no
>> >> Basic Auth) this really isn't possible. It's something we'll keep in
>> our
>> >> back pockets for the long-term.
>> >> Great suggestion though, Jesse.
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Doug
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >> Doug Williams
>> >> Twitter Platform Support
>> >> http://twitter.com/dougw
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:01 AM, Carlos  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> agreed, I'd like this as well.
>> >>>
>> >>> On May 31, 6:52 pm, Jesse Stay  wrote:
>> >>> > Not going to name names, but there are a few really noisy apps out
>> >>> > there
>> >>> > right now.  It would be really nice if, via either the API (my
>> >>> > preference as
>> >>> > it would be less work on your part and fits well with my app), or
>> the
>> >>> > UI,
>> >>> > you enabled users to block receiving Tweets generated from specific
>> >>> > apps.
>> >>> >  This would then punish the app developers for creating spammy apps
>> and
>> >>> > not
>> >>> > the users themselves for just using what was put out there, making
>> it
>> >>> > much
>> >>> > less of a mess to control.  Facebook does this, as does FriendFeed.
>> >>> >  Any
>> >>> > chance you could enable this (please???) for Twitter?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Thanks,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > @Jesse
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > cashflowclublondon.co.uk
>> >
>> >   ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
>> >`6_ 6  )   `-.  ( ).`-.__.`)
>> >(_Y_.)'  ._   )  `._ `. ``-..-'
>> >  _..`--'_..-_/  /--'_.' ,'
>> > (il),-''  (li),'  ((!.-'
>> > .
>> >
>>
>
>


-- 
cashflowclublondon.co.uk

  ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
   `6_ 6  )   `-.  ( ).`-.__.`)
   (_Y_.)'  ._   )  `._ `. ``-..-'
 _..`--'_..-_/  /--'_.' ,'
(il),-''  (li),'  ((!.-'
.

[twitter-dev] Re: Enable ability to block apps via Twitter or the API

[Developer In London]

But how would the blocked app work out the API key for TweetDeck unless
TweetDeck makes their private API key public?

2009/6/2 Chad Etzel 

>
>


-- 
cashflowclublondon.co.uk

  ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
   `6_ 6  )   `-.  ( ).`-.__.`)
   (_Y_.)'  ._   )  `._ `. ``-..-'
 _..`--'_..-_/  /--'_.' ,'
(il),-''  (li),'  ((!.-'
.

[twitter-dev] Re: Enable ability to block apps via Twitter or the API

[Developer In London]

Couldnt the app-id be made a required parameter for the API calls? That way
it can still work with basic auth.

2009/6/2 Doug Williams 

> Floated the idea. Until we funnel everyone through OAuth (that means no
> Basic Auth) this really isn't possible. It's something we'll keep in our
> back pockets for the long-term.
> Great suggestion though, Jesse.
>
> Cheers,
> Doug
> --
>
> Doug Williams
> Twitter Platform Support
> http://twitter.com/dougw
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:01 AM, Carlos  wrote:
>
>>
>> agreed, I'd like this as well.
>>
>> On May 31, 6:52 pm, Jesse Stay  wrote:
>> > Not going to name names, but there are a few really noisy apps out there
>> > right now.  It would be really nice if, via either the API (my
>> preference as
>> > it would be less work on your part and fits well with my app), or the
>> UI,
>> > you enabled users to block receiving Tweets generated from specific
>> apps.
>> >  This would then punish the app developers for creating spammy apps and
>> not
>> > the users themselves for just using what was put out there, making it
>> much
>> > less of a mess to control.  Facebook does this, as does FriendFeed.  Any
>> > chance you could enable this (please???) for Twitter?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > @Jesse
>>
>
>


-- 
cashflowclublondon.co.uk

  ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
   `6_ 6  )   `-.  ( ).`-.__.`)
   (_Y_.)'  ._   )  `._ `. ``-..-'
 _..`--'_..-_/  /--'_.' ,'
(il),-''  (li),'  ((!.-'
.