11–20 of 75 posts
I wonder if it wasn't, in some way, correlated with the length. More characters means more like to be seen.
"Please follow me on twitter here."
"I have an account on twitter."
"I'm @dcurtis on twitter."
"Follow me at http://twitter.com/dcurtis
They performed poorly.
I wonder if it wasn't, in some way, correlated with the length. More characters means more like to be seen.
I tried other longer but dulled phrases: "Please follow me on twitter here." "I have an account on twitter." "I'm @dcurtis on twitter." "Follow me at http://twitter.com/dcurtis They performed poorly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how about "Follow me on twitter here. I have x followers."?
Similarly, I wonder how some automated text like "11,399 people follow me on Twitter, you should too" would work.
"You're following X, Y, and Z, who are also following me; you should too."
I don't really like the tone I wrote, but you get the idea.
Don't quite know how you can measure that though.
This is fantastic. Just curious - did you run any tests for statistical significance?
The true value for any given sample is pretty likely (> 95%) to be within +/-2 standard errors. So in this case, the difference needs to be more than 0.6%~1.0%, depending on the experiments you're comparing. In other words, these look like they're significant differences.
(For reference SE ~ sqrt(p*(1-p)/N) when N is small relative to the population size)
I've read in the past that telling people to do something isn't as effective as telling them that everyone else is doing it. I wonder how a phrase like "most people who like my blog follow me on twitter" would fare?
http://www.moskalyuk.com/blog/yes-50-scientifically-proven-w...
(This link is via HN, naturally: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=613402)
I would wager that the third message would fare better than the fourth (of the examples you gave) if you rephrased:
You should follow me on Twitter
to:
You should follow me on Twitter