<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Dalai Lama reincarnated on Twitter &#8211; changes to non-affiliated account &#8211; keeps 21,000+ followers</title> <atom:link href="http://www.geardiary.com/2009/02/22/dalai-lama-reincarnated-on-twitter-changes-to-non-affiliated-account-keeps-21000-followers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2009/02/22/dalai-lama-reincarnated-on-twitter-changes-to-non-affiliated-account-keeps-21000-followers/</link> <description>Everyone can understand technology; sometimes it just takes a little translating.</description> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:34:00 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: Wayne Schulz</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2009/02/22/dalai-lama-reincarnated-on-twitter-changes-to-non-affiliated-account-keeps-21000-followers/#comment-42412</link> <dc:creator>Wayne Schulz</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 02:23:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=21906#comment-42412</guid> <description>However in this case Twitter appeared to physically shut down this account (there were screen shots showing that the account was not available). The press reports seemed to indicate that the account was taken offline because it impersonated another person.
When it came back - apparently Twitter allowed whoever is behind the account to transfer all their followers (obtained via what was reported to be an impersonated account).
Totally wrong, imho. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>However in this case Twitter appeared to physically shut down this account (there were screen shots showing that the account was not available). The press reports seemed to indicate that the account was taken offline because it impersonated another person.</p><p>When it came back &#8211; apparently Twitter allowed whoever is behind the account to transfer all their followers (obtained via what was reported to be an impersonated account).</p><p>Totally wrong, imho.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Chris Magnusson</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2009/02/22/dalai-lama-reincarnated-on-twitter-changes-to-non-affiliated-account-keeps-21000-followers/#comment-42410</link> <dc:creator>Chris Magnusson</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 23:28:44 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=21906#comment-42410</guid> <description>I&#039;ve seen this happen with Twitter users with a much smaller number of followers. Afaict, all that has to happen is for a user to request a username change, and anyone following the original user will automatically be following the new user after the change. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;ve seen this happen with Twitter users with a much smaller number of followers. Afaict, all that has to happen is for a user to request a username change, and anyone following the original user will automatically be following the new user after the change.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Wayne Schulz</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2009/02/22/dalai-lama-reincarnated-on-twitter-changes-to-non-affiliated-account-keeps-21000-followers/#comment-42408</link> <dc:creator>Wayne Schulz</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 21:45:20 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=21906#comment-42408</guid> <description>I fail to see how Twitter can shut down an account that has 20,000 for violating TOS and then transferring those users to a new account. Mind boggling. We&#039;ll read about this some more I&#039;m sure. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I fail to see how Twitter can shut down an account that has 20,000 for violating TOS and then transferring those users to a new account. Mind boggling. We&#039;ll read about this some more I&#039;m sure.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Judie Lipsett</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2009/02/22/dalai-lama-reincarnated-on-twitter-changes-to-non-affiliated-account-keeps-21000-followers/#comment-57805</link> <dc:creator>Judie Lipsett</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:06:02 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=21906#comment-57805</guid> <description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;RT @mas90guru: Dalai Lama reincarnated on Twitter - changes to non-affiliated account - keeps 21,000+ followers http://ff.im/-1aEsc&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span
class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span
class="topsy_twitter_username"><span
class="topsy_trackback_content">RT @mas90guru: Dalai Lama reincarnated on Twitter &#8211; changes to non-affiliated account &#8211; keeps 21,000+ followers <a
href="http://ff.im/-1aEsc" rel="nofollow">http://ff.im/-1aEsc</a></span></span></span></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Judie Lipsett</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2009/02/22/dalai-lama-reincarnated-on-twitter-changes-to-non-affiliated-account-keeps-21000-followers/#comment-42401</link> <dc:creator>Judie Lipsett</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:53:58 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=21906#comment-42401</guid> <description>Gah! I saw when the Dalai Lama had supposedly joined Twitter, and I wondered about it, but I didn&#039;t realize the account had been deemed a fake; it figures. And only YOU would think to follow him, just to say &quot;hello Dalai.&quot; ;-)
The scenario you present about possible spammers collecting names for future bombardment from fake accounts named for popular people is real enough, and the loophole Twitter has surprisingly allowed has obnoxious implications. Good find! </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gah! I saw when the Dalai Lama had supposedly joined Twitter, and I wondered about it, but I didn&#039;t realize the account had been deemed a fake; it figures. And only YOU would think to follow him, just to say &quot;hello Dalai.&quot; <img
src='http://www.geardiary.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /></p><p>The scenario you present about possible spammers collecting names for future bombardment from fake accounts named for popular people is real enough, and the loophole Twitter has surprisingly allowed has obnoxious implications. Good find!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
