You shouldn't penalize those who follow a lot of people.
I notice that those who follow 10% of those who follow them get higher scores that people with higher follower/following numbers. I don't think this kind of nonreciprocal relationships should be valued higher than reciprocal relationships (follow those who follow you). Social media is about mutual relationships, not eliteness.
I follow people and am interested in what people are doing..
I think the difference between followers and followed a criterion is valid only for celebrities. Many people follow the twitter themes, like orkut communities, these issues should be grouped by type, negatives, positives, etc. ... so as not to interfere in the rankings, eg @obama_fans, @obama_theone , @obama_cool, etc ... would be grouped and only one would appear in rank.
I have over 5,000 followers and I follow back because I think it's the right thing to do and I'm interested in what they have to say,yet you rate people with only 2,000 followers and fewer updates and activity in the same time period as me, much higher. In fact I don't even show on your so-called elite list.
I disagree. Why should I be penalised for being discerning ¬ blindly returning unsolicited follows from folks who don't work in my industry, 'share my interests, or ever read what the thousands of people they are following are saying. I actively add new follows and actively unfollow less interesting tweeps on an ongoing basis. That's discerning community building. Don't punish it.
I amend this slightly. It use to be that an even number of following/followers meant that people were interested in creating reciprocal relationships. Now, it's often a sign that inidividuals are using an Auto-Follow bot to rapidly raise their follower numbers. It's become the opposite of creating relationships, it's about amassing followers. Such a shame that the system is being used like that.