It didn’t surprise me that I didn’t rank on the list. The amount of techcomm-related publishing I’ve done (blog posts, articles elsewhere, tweets, LinkedIn posts, FB posts) have been minimal, unless it’s an overlap with content strategy. And then, as someone mentioned, the hash tag lengths restrict my choice. I’m more likely to use #contentstrategy and hope that if it’s of interest to the techcomm community, someone will retweet and change the hash tag. And I suppose that’s why I made the content strategy list that Mindtouch published a while back.

And that’s the thing about lists. Being a full-fledged, lifetime member of the awkward squad, I never expect to be part of the cool crowd. But algorithms don’t care whether you’re cute and bubbly or a hipster. Algorithmic hiccups aside, the list is based on substance, not personal politics. What’s more important is how you assess and then use the list. I may not hire someone based on how far up the list their name is, but the list may serve some other purpose that ends in a serendipitous find.

As a conversation piece it is valuable, of course, but as Sarah suggests this is just one of many ways of interacting with this big messy community/profession we share.

I like it. Not because I’m on it but because it gets people talking, and exploring, our profession.

When I look at a list of influencers such as the one we’re discussing, I see it as just one source of information about who are the people to follow. I guess the aim of the tool is to provide a definitive list by aggregating information from various sources. But I also know that I have my own priorities and requirements when deciding who is influential. Indeed, I may compile a number of different lists based on my reason for wanting the list in the first place.

So, while it’s great to be on a list, it’s even greater to be part of the wide, messy community that is the web. And I’m hoping that anyone whose looking for influential people will spread their search wider than just one list.

Kudos to MindTouch for jumping in and getting us all talking. I love the work you guys do. And I love the community of tech writers that we all are.

Cheers, Sarah

I second your point about language, esp. seeing that at least one account tweeting in Spanish made the list (and another one often tweeting in Danish – Hi, Karen!). If that

I second Jason’s point about tweet content. I’ve had a lot of fun with personal and/or plain silly tweets, but like him, I try to keep it professionally relevant for the most part and like to follow those who do (unless I know them personally).

I understand and respect that Aaron cannot say more about an unreleased tool, but the situation is a bit awkward and makes me disagree that “objective with some anomalies [is] preferable to something that was subjective.”

On a positive note, I’ve discovered more than 20 twitterers I wouldn’t know about without the list, so I’m fine with the list and my position on it, I just wish it was a little more reliable in terms of who’s ranked and on which position.