We would like users to be judicious with their following habits and only follow users who contribute value to their timeline. This justifies the following limits we impose. We are aware that many users would like to accept all incoming directs. This, along with the quid pro quo following to build community, capture the majority of the use-cases for auto-following. We are discussing internally how to best approach these two uses within the bounds of the product we are trying to build. At this time we have nothing to report but know we are actively thinking about these ideas.
Thanks, Doug On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Jesse Stay <jesses...@gmail.com> wrote: > Also, how do you recommend we deal with the larger users that would like to > follow back their followers? With the hard limit of 1,000 follows per day, > there is no way they'll ever catch up, as some of them have more than 1k new > followers per day as is. If this limit were more dynamic based on the size > of the user that would be nice. Capabilities to follow people in bulk may > also help. > Of course, I think many of these would no longer need to follow back if > they could just have the option to enable anyone to DM them if they choose. > I think that's the underlying cause to want to auto-follow for most people. > The only other cause is for an additional token/feeling of community, > although I think many would be willing to forgo that if they had the ability > to just allow everyone to DM them - it feels good to have someone you admire > follow you back, even if it's not 100% sincere. > > Jesse > > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:07 AM, Jesse Stay <jesses...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Yes, that's what appears to be happening. My experience starts at around >> 500K+. I'm okay with waiting with my script if you guys need to take longer >> to retrieve the info. Or if you'd prefer we paginate I'll start doing that >> as well. Maybe a hard limit of 200K and you have to Page to get above that? >> Jesse >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Doug Williams <d...@twitter.com> wrote: >> >>> I've heard that list sizes greater than 150K-200K start to return >>> timeouts at higher rates. Although I'd enjoy hearing first-hand experiences >>> and recommendations. >>> Thanks, >>> Doug >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Jesse Stay <jesses...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> In my case specifically it's the Social Graph methods. I didn't realize >>>> you had paging available now. Is there some logic as to when I should >>>> expect to page and when I can just rely on the full result? >>>> Jesse >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Doug Williams <d...@twitter.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> What methods in particular are you referring to? The social graph >>>>> methods now support paging so retrieving all of that data is now possible, >>>>> where it used to throw 502s. It does however require a bit of application >>>>> logic to assume when paging is necessary (e.g. large follower counts). >>>>> Additionally, we are making changes to the databases which cause latency >>>>> that result in periodic 502s. We are not able to give definitive ETAs on >>>>> these fixes due to priorities that change as unforeseeable critical needs >>>>> arise. >>>>> More specificity would be beneficial. Do you have a replaceable bug, >>>>> problem, or suggestion that you would like to discuss? >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Doug >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Jesse Stay <jesses...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I was discussing this with Iain, and have also talked about it with >>>>>> Damon, so I know I'm not alone in this. I am having huge issues >>>>>> retrieving >>>>>> follower and friend data for the larger users (1 million+ followers), >>>>>> most >>>>>> of the time returning 502 Bad Gateway errors. I know there are a few of >>>>>> these users getting really frustrated about our apps not being able to >>>>>> retrieve data for them. Is there a plan to fix this? Is the API team >>>>>> aware >>>>>> of this? Any ETA by chance? >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> @Jesse >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
