As someone who spends part of his time curating biology stuff, I don’t get this common tech press claim (boldface mine; behind paywall):

But algorithmic feeds– which yes, power users freak out about– make Twitter seem more approachable. The biggest problem, as Josh Elman and others have noted, is that curating a great Twitter following is a shit load of work. If you cave to the social pressure of adding everyone who adds you, you wind up with a garden full of weeds. Scanning it is unsatisfying and if you leave it open on your browser the growing counter of unread Tweets starts to feel like a to-do box. You want a perfect mix of people who are great thinkers and curators. Following any more than 300 people, in my experience, is completely unmanageable if you are actually looking at even 30% of your feed every day. Otherwise you give up and just check notifications.

I don’t get this: all you have to do is click and unclick the follow button. It’s just not that hard. It’s not like there’s a literature you have to read or priority decisions that have to be made.

Someone annoys you or is just tweeting lots of stuff you don’t care to read, push the button. If anything, finding people when you’re a newbie can be hard, but paring back?

Weird.