Admit or not, we all have our little secret methods of deciding whether to follow someone on Twitter or not. Luckily, the guys over at TechCrunch shed some light on the Golden Ratio theory of following users on Twitter.

The Golden Ratio, or the followers versus following theory is something that most Twitter power users seem to use. When you first join Twitter, you don’t look twice into the details of the person who is following you. But after your followers number increases, things tend to change.

The Twitter timeline tends to get a little polluted with irrelevant tweets after you have more than one or two hundred followers. Not everything in your stream is relevant to you anymore and a filtering system must come into place. That’s where the Golden Ratio theory becomes handy.

Dirty little secrets: deciding who to follow on Twitter might not be the easiest thing to do, but the Golden Ratio method could really help. | Photo: Andy Beez on Flickr

The Golden Ratio method is quite simple: the less people someone follows and the more people are following that person, the user becomes more follow-worthy.

Even though it might not sound as the fairest method to judge whether to follow someone or not, this makes it quite easy to find out which users have the best signal to noise ratio.

So, if the number of followers a user has is greater than the number of people that certain user is following, the TechCrunch guys say that it could be worth clicking through that person’s profile.

But if a person follows significantly more people than the number of users it is followed by, then you should probably think twice before following back.

Do you use the Golden Ratio method to decide which users are worthy of following on Twitter or you have some other mechanism of selecting who you follow back? Sound off in the comments.

Twitter has become known for it’s crazy and crude followers, such as toilets that tweeted people’s bowel movements, and a farting chair. Now a new Twitter account, Twitt Sex allows users to sign up and check out pornographic tweets.

Claiming to be the adult version of Twitter, Twitt Sex allows users to share explicit content on the site, from photos to porn sites, and these tweets will appear in other user’s streams. Currently, the site is in the early stages (only 2 people have accounts and it seems no-one can create one yet), despite their Terms and Conditions dated from August 3rd 2007. More curiously, the T&C’s reference a “twittr.com”, despite older versions of Twitter being known as “Twttr.com”.

Sex has always been a popular topic within communication technology, such as phone sex and various forms of porn sites, but the time it has taken for someone to create an explicit site through Twitter seems slow off the mark, and will possibly now only increase the amount of sexually natured spam accounts on Twitter, despite the official Twitter status blog promising crackdowns. How long it takes before the accounts behind this site are targeted is yet to be seen, but we’re guessing it won’t be long.

Could the days of often annoying auto accounts, and so called ‘Twitter bots’ be over? It seems that Twitter wants to take action against such accounts if a recent developer email is to be believed. The message in full detailed how the use of various third party applications to gain followers would result in the offending account possibly being suspended.

Doug Williams of Twitter revealed that Twitter was planning to take action on such unavailing accounts. He detailed the processes that a large number of these accounts take, for example an account will start by following a large mass of individuals and benefit from the social connections made, but then if an individual does not reciprocate the follow back, the connection is then broken. Through gaining a large number of mass followers via this method an inaccurate portrayal of the offending account’s legitimacy is depicted, which on a whole degrades the Twitter experience for all.

Are auto follow tools a bad thing, are you sick of auto direct messages, and do you want less ‘noise’ on Twitter?