Twitter is just a dopamine trap disguised as ‘information’.

To them, you’re just another number, and their primary goal is to keep you hooked on the platform.

But we can fight back:

Say no to the dopamine addiction and stop being manipulated by what the algo thinks is the ‘best’ content for us.

AI slop is increasing by the day, so we have to be proactive in cutting out the noise and finding signal.

But, we have to learn how the algorithm works first:

The idea of an echo chamber is very real on Twitter:

With millions of posts being published everyday, the algo will share content it thinks you like the best to keep you on the platform.

Their priority is to keep you engaged, so that Twitter will continue earning from ads.

The algo sorts each account and post into different categories, and they’ll show you content based on your previous engagements.

If I create a brand new account, the feed that I see will be completely different from my current one in this account.

Here’s an example of how it looks like (with tons of useless giveaways):

The algo would show posts with the highest engagement (because it increases the chances of me interacting with it).

But sometimes, this is not what we always want.

High engagement doesn’t always guarantee high signal, so I have to curate my feed with these steps:

I fell for Ardizor and thought he was the master of airdrops at the start.

I consumed every thread he wrote and followed every action he shared.

Which likely just made me another Sybil.

When you’re new to CT, the algo will serve content with the highest engagement.

But that doesn’t mean that they’re correct or right.

After a while, we hone our judgment to determine what can be trusted or not.

So during this period, I wouldn’t believe everything I see and take their word as gospel.

At the start, we need to set our goals of what we want to achieve here and find accounts that match our goals.

Everyone is different, and my content may not even be the best approach for you.

Especially if you don’t agree with my strategies.

But to find those to follow, we have to tell the algo what we don’t want to see first:

Removing noise is all about hiding the noise generators.

I find muting to be better than blocking, because muting is silent:

The account won’t know that you’ve muted them, while they will when you block them.

This would create unnecessary drama when the other account finds out, so I want to avoid that completely.

Sometimes, I completely forget an account exists after muting them.

Just like @beast_ico, you wouldn’t guess how big my mute list is.

Here are the types of content I would mute:

• Ardizor style threads

These are dopamine-fuelled posts that focus on you getting rich with flashy PnL screenshots.

The only focus is getting your attention, but the posts usually have zero substance.

It’s easy to spot the patterns in the post, such as:

1. Making bold/outrageous claims

2. Typing in all caps

3. Screen recordings to increase time on content, but those recordings are usually useless

I’ll mute any account that adopts this same style.

At the end of these farming threads, they’ll include a bunch of other farmers in their engagement group.

So it’s a great way to mute all of them too, and never see their posts again.

• Undisclosed shills

The whole Gala Games controversy showed how undisclosed shills are still a thing in this space.

But it’s easy to spot these shills:

They are usually more emotional and hype-driven compared to their usual posts.

Unless all of their posts are engagement bait, then I’ll mute them too.

If the undisclosed shill QTs the tweet from the project, it’s even easier to spot all of these shills from different accounts (via View Post Engagements).

I don’t need this noise on my timeline as it‘ll skew my perception of these projects (after consuming all of these ads).

• Engagement farmers who rely on hype and drama

Some accounts act like they’re giving a lot of ‘alpha’, but they’re just serving the algo instead.

Just like Fabrizio Romano for football transfer rumours:

These accounts are excellent at saying nothing with a lot of words.

If you’ve felt like you’ve learnt nothing from the post, then it likely fits this criteria.

Others would farm engagement through giveaways or ‘selling’ their status as a smart follower.

This just generates a lot of noise, which I don’t need on the timeline.

• Paid ad billboards

Some accounts have made yapper leaderboards their only personality, and it’s so easy to identify them:

Go through their profile, and every single tweet is about a yapper leaderboard project.

These accounts have zero personality and would talk about projects that give them rewards, but stop when the incentives are gone.

• AI content

I would mute those who let ChatGPT write the content for them.

Once you know the patterns, it’s easy to spot AI slop.

So it doesn’t mean that emdashes are the only indicator of AI content.

I’m not saying that using AI to create content is always bad.

But if AI does the entire process of creating content from idea generation to writing the post:

That account is not worth spending my time reading their content.

As I’m just able to use ChatGPT to produce the exact same content.

Accounts that stand out are ones who share authentic thoughts but use AI to scale their ideas.

• Cynical and condescending

I would mute accounts that have a lot of negative energy:

1. Complaining that airdrops are dead

2. Mocking others’ mistakes or failures

3. Hurling toxic comments at the team or brand accounts (a classic example being ZKsync)

Yes, airdrops are no longer as ‘easy’ as before.

But my belief is either you continue doing them or quit completely.

There’s no point staying in between and complaining about how bad they are now.

The algo loves to amplify negative voices as they get the most engagement.

But these just worsen our mental health.

• Avoid muting keywords

Others have suggested muting keywords, but I’d only mute projects if I’m completely sure that I won’t interact with them.

Because this would be a blanket mute, and I’d never see anything about it on my feed again.

I’d also be careful with muting projects with ‘general’ names, i.e. they will appear in normal posts.

For example, muting ‘Noble’ or ‘Stable’ could remove some tweets that are unrelated to the projects themselves.

Though you could follow @zachxbt’s mute list if you’re done with all the noise on InfoFi.

• ‘Not interested’ is somewhat effective

I’ve seen many complain about tagging posts as ‘Not interested’ is useless.

But thanks to @SwizzyOnChain’s suggestion, it’s actually easy tag posts on mobile:

As compared to the 2 clicks I need to tag a post on desktop.

I added the left swipe gesture as ‘Not interested’ so I can scroll down the timeline and spam tag posts that are pure dopamine baits.

I wish there could be a mute gesture too, but this is decent enough.

Any form of engagement with a post gives the algo a signal that you like it.

In particular, how much time you spend tells the algo to share similar content with you.

You may also notice that you see more posts from the same account after liking and commenting on their previous posts.

Especially if you’ve just followed them recently.

So choose to be extremely selective with what content you engage with:

We want the algo to feed us high quality posts instead of useless hype and drama.

And I’d start with finding high-value creators that provide tons of signal:

While the algo wants to feed you with dopamine hits, the real signal comes from long-form creators.

Many are excellent at writing viral posts that generate tons of views and engagement.

But these same creators can’t write a long-form piece on the topic that they’re writing about.

Long-form creators are ones who provide tons of value and clarity of thought without relying on hype or drama.

These are the accounts that periodically post long-forms on Twitter or Substack.

They are usually well respected in the space, and would interact with other high-value creators.

So we can see who they reply to and follow those accounts to build our social graph of alpha further.

Most advice tells us to be ‘terminally online’ to grow on Twitter, but this burned me out.

I was caught in the trap of looking at my notifications constantly to send the fastest reply to a big account’s post.

But this made me distracted and I couldn’t focus on other tasks (like managing my airdrop wallet or writing).

I would start to mindlessly scroll on the timeline, which wastes a lot of time.

So I’ve started setting fixed times to be on Twitter, and it has enhanced my focus:

I only use Twitter in two half-hour sessions per day on desktop to clear my notifications and see if there’s anything interesting on the timeline that I can reply to.

Since I’ve already scheduled all my content with Typefully, there’s no need to always be on Twitter.

Limiting my time reduces my exposure to noise and dopamine, which reduces my addiction.

A great reminder from @Zeneca that what we consume here will determine our views and perceptions.

The algo is doing its best to force feed us with dopamine so we stay stimulated and on the platform for longer.

But we can push back:

We need a more proactive approach in curating our feed to remove all the noise.

This brings clarity to our minds, and we’re able to function with agency.