The Problem with Twitter Lists (opens in new tab)

The author seems to think that lists should be their own accounts (with multiple owners), but the purpose of lists is different: they allow a user to organize their (too busy to make sense of) feed into subfeeds that are more manageable.

My main problem with the current implementation is that I can't view all my lists at the same time, side by side (so I still use my own quick-and-dirty Python app to do that).

The author's point about being put in lists named "big fat hairy men" is quite valid though, I think the lists should be private (or at least not visible on the listed user's info page).

Why should people be allowed to remove themselves from other people's lists?

I agree with some of the statements of the blog. However it misses one important point in how people use lists. For example I follow around 300 people, some of them are very noisy some times but eventually they post something interesting, so I feel that the noisy is an acceptable price to pay. Nevertheless, because of the overflow of information, many times I miss posts of quiet people that generally have something important to say. Then, lists come to the rescue. I just put those very interesting people in a list that I can check for time to time. If people follow my list(s), they give the authority that I created it(them)or whatever I do not really care. For me that is just marketing trying to convince of the value of twitter. For me, the value is finding good content with less effort; and I think the lists are helping on it.

Note: I use also tweetdeck that has a similar concept, which I found very useful. Perhaps that is why I liked the lists concept.

I'm guessing that most people check which lists they're in. I do. (I'm only in 11 lists so it was easy for me.) If so, the point about the viral loop doesn't stand.