This morning I read an excellent article about Metrics, and the age we're in. It inspired me to try out TweetLevel, which was referenced. Here are the results.

My Influence, Popularity, and Engagement levels on Twitter are about at where I'd expect them (meaning they are all about equal), but apparently and according to this little algorithm, I need to work better to earn your trust (on twitter anyway). Influence is based on the numbers of RT's I get, Popularity is based on the number followers I have, Engagement is a measure of how I engage, respond, and converse with tweeps, and Trust is also a measure of the number of RT's I get from my followers and the public timeline. Here's how I stack up in comparison to people I follow:

I rank a little higher than Katie at GigaOM, but lower than John at All Things Digital, and a whole grade point lower than Walt Mossberg. ...Good company as far as I'm concerned, despite my apparent inability to win trust. None of these folks know me directly (though Walt knows my Dad, and I know Walt would say he trusts him).

I would estimate 10% of all my Twitter followers, or 50 people, know me personally and professionally - folks who have met me in person, have worked with me, have had face-to-face conversations with me, etc. Here's a question for these folks... How trustworthy am I? I'd really like to know what you think. Anath's piece makes me curious - curious how trustworthy metricocracy is. ;-)