Twitter algorithm viral domination?

[RaeLaugh]

Has anyone managed to decipher Twitter's algorithm for achieving viral content? It appears that likes and even comments hold more value now compared to retweets, which used to be the primary metric for viral reach.

 

[BomberFestive]

Requesting your friends to fabricate a made-up event in response to a tweet is the sole method to manipulate Twitter. Alternatively, you can use a social media marketing (SMM) panel to purchase certain engagements. It seems that nowadays, the significance of likes outweighs that of retweets.

 

[Drophe]

Around a month ago, I conducted a test and came to the same conclusion that likes carry more significance than retweets. Additionally, it appears that receiving comments is crucial.

 

[Noticess]

The algorithm for closing the door is likely designed in a way that incorporates random elements, making it difficult for anyone to reverse-engineer the algorithm. Instead of being predictable, people can only speculate or make educated guesses about its workings.

 

[Poddyvi]

I concur. It appears that there is a deeper aspect to the situation, and I'm uncertain about what it entails.

 

[BroadwayChan]

The algorithm for closing the door is likely designed in a way that incorporates random elements, making it difficult for anyone to reverse-engineer the algorithm. Instead of being predictable, people can only speculate or make educated guesses about its workings.

I agree because in the past, I had considerable success hacking into Twitter accounts. However, I took a break for about a year. Now that I'm back at it, I'm facing difficulties gaining followers and creating viral tweets.

It appears that the number of likes is highly valued on Twitter. Additionally, I noticed that the home page highlights when Elon Musk is trending, and tweets that include "Elon Musk" tend to get promoted. Furthermore, it notifies users when Elon Musk likes a tweet.

It seems that to create a viral tweet, you need to include the trending topic in your tweet. For example, if Dogecoin is being widely discussed and promoted on people's home pages, you would need to mention "Dogecoin" in your tweet. Additionally, the tweet must have good engagement to have a chance of going viral.

I believe I may have found a strategy for achieving virality, although I'm not entirely sure. Here's my idea: I will create a main Twitter account, which I'll refer to as the "Mother account." This account will tweet about a trending and popular topic, such as "High Gas Prices." The tweet might be something like, "Damn, these high gas prices are killing me. Like this if you're feeling the impact of gas prices too."

Then, I'll create 2-3 additional accounts, which I'll call "slave accounts." These slave accounts will retweet and like the tweet from the Mother account. After that, I'll have 2-3 more slave accounts like the retweeted tweet from the previous set of slave accounts. Finally, I'll have around 5 slave accounts like the tweet from the second set of slave accounts. This way, the engagement will appear more organic and genuine.

Instead of directly using 20 slave accounts to like and retweet the tweet from the Mother account, which might be easily detected as bot activity by Twitter, this approach of funneling engagement from page to page should be more beneficial. I'm planning to test this strategy tonight.

Twitter has proven to be a lucrative platform for me over the years, and I've made a lot of money from it.

 

[Gneissm]

I agree because in the past, I had considerable success hacking into Twitter accounts. However, I took a break for about a year. Now that I'm back at it, I'm facing difficulties gaining followers and creating viral tweets.

It appears that the number of likes is highly valued on Twitter. Additionally, I noticed that the home page highlights when Elon Musk is trending, and tweets that include "Elon Musk" tend to get promoted. Furthermore, it notifies users when Elon Musk likes a tweet.

It seems that to create a viral tweet, you need to include the trending topic in your tweet. For example, if Dogecoin is being widely discussed and promoted on people's home pages, you would need to mention "Dogecoin" in your tweet. Additionally, the tweet must have good engagement to have a chance of going viral.

I believe I may have found a strategy for achieving virality, although I'm not entirely sure. Here's my idea: I will create a main Twitter account, which I'll refer to as the "Mother account." This account will tweet about a trending and popular topic, such as "High Gas Prices." The tweet might be something like, "Damn, these high gas prices are killing me. Like this if you're feeling the impact of gas prices too."

Then, I'll create 2-3 additional accounts, which I'll call "slave accounts." These slave accounts will retweet and like the tweet from the Mother account. After that, I'll have 2-3 more slave accounts like the retweeted tweet from the previous set of slave accounts. Finally, I'll have around 5 slave accounts like the tweet from the second set of slave accounts. This way, the engagement will appear more organic and genuine.

Instead of directly using 20 slave accounts to like and retweet the tweet from the Mother account, which might be easily detected as bot activity by Twitter, this approach of funneling engagement from page to page should be more beneficial. I'm planning to test this strategy tonight.

Twitter has proven to be a lucrative platform for me over the years, and I've made a lot of money from it.

Does this work?

 

[Sionerpo]

I'm uncertain whether it will be successful if you use your secondary account to retweet from the secondary account itself, rather than gradually liking and retweeting from secondary accounts.

 

[TreasureCent]

I am unable to understand or grasp the meaning of something.

 

[Copeophav]

I am unable to understand or grasp the meaning of something.

Your attempt to gradually release retweets and likes from your mother's account in order to gain attention will not be successful. Currently, the key performance indicator for achieving virality on Twitter is the gradual and consistent accumulation of likes.

 

[RomanceLinkin]

Your attempt to gradually release retweets and likes from your mother's account in order to gain attention will not be successful. Currently, the key performance indicator for achieving virality on Twitter is the gradual and consistent accumulation of likes.

What is the meaning of KPI? I'm still not understanding your statement about drip feeding not working on mother accounts. However, you mentioned that the main KPI (Key Performance Indicator, a metric used to measure success) for going viral is to drip feed likes. This seems contradictory to me, unless I'm missing something.

Are you suggesting that drip feeding is now the best method for achieving virality? So, if I have 50 accounts, is it preferable to gradually give likes to my mother account's tweet?

Instead of immediately giving the post 50 likes, would it have a better chance of going viral if I spread those 50 likes over the course of an hour?

I would like to clarify whether this is something you can confirm or if you are making an assumption.

 

[AmericaGlace]

What is the meaning of KPI? I'm still not understanding your statement about drip feeding not working on mother accounts. However, you mentioned that the main KPI (Key Performance Indicator, a metric used to measure success) for going viral is to drip feed likes. This seems contradictory to me, unless I'm missing something.

Are you suggesting that drip feeding is now the best method for achieving virality? So, if I have 50 accounts, is it preferable to gradually give likes to my mother account's tweet?

Instead of immediately giving the post 50 likes, would it have a better chance of going viral if I spread those 50 likes over the course of an hour?

I would like to clarify whether this is something you can confirm or if you are making an assumption.

Allow me to clarify. I apologize for not being able to respond adequately earlier. Here's a rephrased version of your strategy:

The main approach you described involves having a primary Twitter account (referred to as the "Mother account") that posts tweets. Additionally, you would have 2-3 secondary accounts (known as "Slave accounts") that retweet and like the Mother account's tweets. Furthermore, each of these Slave accounts would also like the retweets from the other Slave accounts.

In essence, this strategy is a gradual distribution of engagement (drip-feed) through retweets and likes. The aim is to create a more natural appearance in terms of engagement.

Based on this, my suggestion is to focus solely on acquiring likes rather than retweets and likes. By doing so, you can take advantage of the potential for your tweets to go viral and gain more visibility.

 

[Cornulan]

Allow me to clarify. I apologize for not being able to respond adequately earlier. Here's a rephrased version of your strategy:

The main approach you described involves having a primary Twitter account (referred to as the "Mother account") that posts tweets. Additionally, you would have 2-3 secondary accounts (known as "Slave accounts") that retweet and like the Mother account's tweets. Furthermore, each of these Slave accounts would also like the retweets from the other Slave accounts.

In essence, this strategy is a gradual distribution of engagement (drip-feed) through retweets and likes. The aim is to create a more natural appearance in terms of engagement.

Based on this, my suggestion is to focus solely on acquiring likes rather than retweets and likes. By doing so, you can take advantage of the potential for your tweets to go viral and gain more visibility.

I understand.

What is the definition of KPI?

So, you're uncertain about whether drip feeding is superior?

Why is it preferable to use it only for Likes instead of both Retweets and Likes?

It appears that Retweets and Likes combined would be more effective, right?

Is this what the algorithm looks for, or is it just your personal opinion?

 

[YauSmug]

I understand.

What is the definition of KPI?

So, you're uncertain about whether drip feeding is superior?

Why is it preferable to use it only for Likes instead of both Retweets and Likes?

It appears that Retweets and Likes combined would be more effective, right?

Is this what the algorithm looks for, or is it just your personal opinion?

This has been my go-to strategy for a few years now. It's more of a recommendation based on the performance of my farming activities.