Why You Should Use Unfollow Tools

Jun 20, 2011 by Ajeet Khurana

The use of unfollow tools has been increased dramatically in the past few years. When people were beleaguered by the constant flow of spam, unfollow tools came in the scene. These unfollow tools help you to maintain the quality of your twitter feed as well getting rid of redundant spammers. There can be several reasons why we should use unfollow tools, let’s take a look at it.

Spam Free Community

This is why unfollow tools were developed, to keep the community spam free. When twitter surfaced the web, it was more or good a nice and clean site. But spammers found their own goldmine in twitter and started to come in bunches. Now, there are thousands of bots and spammers in twitter account that completely acts like a human but an automated bot. Unfollow tools help you eliminate these useless spammers by using several behavior pattern analysis. With different unfollow tools, you can filter your followers based on their activity, avatar, interaction, tweets etc. You can easily remove the spammers by these different types of lists.

Save Your Valuable Time

Just imagine if there were no unfollow tools, you are manually opening the profiles of your friends and clicking unfollow from the list of thousand followers. This sure can be pretty time consuming. That’s why one of the best features of unfollow tools is saving time. It can save you ample time by filtering people according to your choice. For example, with UnTweeps, you can select a time range for which period the people were inactive. It will come up with a list of people inactive within that time range and make it easy for you to inactive. Manually, however, this task is impossible to do. There is no way that you can go on and check each and every profile to see their last tweet time and remove them.

Organizing your Twitter Account

Customarily we start twitter to follow almost everyone live on the social platform. However, at point it seems hard to keep a track with almost everyone and find the valuable tweets. Even, filtering does not help in most of the cases. That is why we need to organize and manage our twitter account properly. With the help of different unfollow tools it is quite easy to find some useless people in a profile and eliminate them to ensure a quality feed. If you want to stay updated and need someone with good tweets, you might prefer deleting the people that are not active for a certain period of time. Or if you are bogged-down by stream of cluttered tweets you might opt to delete them as well. The unfollow tools help you get rid of all these type of people and let you manage your twitter account.

No Installation Needed!

Most of the unfollow tools available now are web-based and have a good looking interface. There is no need for installation of any software which is a good thing for the safety of our own pc. You can save lots of hassles by just using web-based unfollow tools.

Also Read:

• 5 Unfollow Tools to Keep Your Twitter Account Spam Free
• Using Unfollow Tools to Your Advantage
• ManageFlitter
• Pitfalls of Unfollowing on Twitter
• UnTweeps

What People Are Looking For:

twitter unfollow free tool, delete bots from twitter, unfollow remover, unfollow filter, twitter unfollow tool that wont update your profile, twitter spam unfollow, twitter how to filter without ungollow, the best way to unfollow everybody on twitter is, remove unfollower, remove twitter inactive.

Related Posts

Tags

Share This

 

Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.

Powered by WP Greet Box WordPress Plugin

Every once in awhile I experience something that I feel compelled to share even if it strays from the subject matter of my blog.  Especially when the information doesn’t quite exist.  That’s what happened to me last week when I realized late in the game that I had misplaced my passport 2 days before my trip to SES Toronto.  Oops.

I immediately turned to the web to see what my options were.  I learned that the birth certificate & drivers license wouldn’t get it done so I either had to find a way to get a replacement passport or no trip for me.  Surprisingly, it is possible to get a passport on the same day, but it requires jumping through quite a few hoops.  So here is my step by step process that you can take to get yourself a same day passport.  It’s not a guarantee, but if you take these steps, you have a good shot.

1. First step is to find a passport agency that you can get to.  Without one of these you’re out of luck.  Visit this page to see where the nearest agency you can get to is.
2. Once you have your agency identified, call 1-877-487-2778 to schedule an appointment ASAP.  Take the earliest appointment you can get, because then it’s more likely they will be able to get your passport created before they close.  Obviously if you have more then one day to work with, you have some flexibility here.  However if you need it that same day, your only shot is most likely an early morning appointment.  Be sure to write down your confirmation #.  You’ll need this when you arrive.
3. Okay, here’s where I messed up a bit.  Save yourself the time and waiting longer in line by having whatever forms you need filled out and printed prior to arriving.  Depending on your situation, you may need to fill out a few forms.  You can access them here.  You can fill out online and print, or print and fill out by hand.  Regardless of your situation, you’ll need to fill out the DS-11 Application for a Passport.  I had lost mine so I had to also fill out the DS-64 Statement Regarding a Lost or Stolen Passport.  You can get these forms at the office and fill out there, but you’ll lose valuable time.
4. In addition to the forms, you will need to bring your state issued birth certificate, not a copy and it has to be issued by the state you were born in.  You’ll also need your drivers license.
5. You’ll need 2 passport photos in hand at the office.  Honestly, the easiest thing to do here is to just go to a Walgreens, or some local drug store that does these.  It’s quick and easy, and you’ll ensure the proper requirements are met.  If you are ambitious, you can do this yourself by following these directions.
6. You’ll need a check, money order or credit card on hand.  For same day passports expect a fee of around $195 (that’s what I paid).  It is quite a bit more then a normal process, but when you’re desperate, it’s not too bad.  Especially considering their are quite a few websites that are actually charging 3x this much for similar services.  DO NOT use these services unless you do not have access to a passport agency.  You’ll be paying way more then necessary, and will actually not be able to get your passport as quickly as you could.
7. You need to print out your travel itinerary showing that you are traveling out of country soon.  This is important as without this, they will not expedite your passport as quickly as you need it.
8. Try to get to the Miami Passport Agency 15 minutes before your appointment.  IMPORTANT NOTE:  Be nice!  It sounds silly but the reality is the people behind the counter are pretty much the ones who can and will dictate whether they will accommodate you.  Seems crazy but it’s true.  Be nice, conversational, and you’ll have a good shot of getting what you need as long as you bring everything required.
9. If they are able to accommodate your same day request, expect to either stick around all day, or come back to pick your passport up.  I checked in at 9am, and my passport was ready for me at 3pm.  Most of these offices will not let you use your cell phone or laptop there, so be prepared if you plan on waiting.

That’s it.  I successfully was able to get my passport on the same day using these steps.  If you have any questions, feel free to comment and I will respond.  And if anyone else has experienced something similar or different, would love to have you share.  Good luck!

Related posts:

1. SES Toronto & WebNation TV Appearance
2. 5 Steps To A Professional Grade Blog On A Budget

Opposition to QRM proposal picks up steam

Rule would not require 20% down payments, say regulator 

The campaign to shoot down a proposal by federal regulators that lenders be required to retain at least 5 percent of the risk on mortgages they securitize when borrowers make down payments of less than 20 percent continues to pick up steam.

A coalition of consumer organizations, civil rights groups, lenders, real estate professionals and insurers coordinated with lawmakers today in bringing pressure to bear on regulators, releasing a white paper and joint letters from members of the House and Senate who have taken issue with the proposal.

Six federal agencies — the Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Housing Finance Agency — are in the process of implementing risk retention policies mandated in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, signed into law last year.

Some provisions of the sweeping legislation were intended to address problems created when loans are bundled into mortgage-backed securities and sold to investors.

Although the loan securitization process keeps money flowing into mortgage lending and helps make borrowing more affordable, critics say it also insulated loan originators from losses and encouraged risky underwriting practices during the boom.

Requiring that lenders retain a 5 percent stake in all but the safest loans they securitize gives them “skin in the game” and encourages prudent underwriting, backers of the concept say.

At issue is how regulators will define low-risk loans that will be exempt from the 5 percent risk retention requirement — so-called “qualified residential mortgages,” or QRMs.

The Dodd-Frank bill made no specific reference to down payments, instructing federal regulators to draw up a QRM definition using criteria such as loan type, verification of the borrower’s ability to repay, full documentation, and mitigating factors like mortgage insurance.

In March, regulators proposed that only mortgages in which borrowers put at least 20 percent down be considered QRMs. The proposal would also trigger risk retention requirements on mortgages when front-end debt-to-income ratios exceed 28 percent, and back-end ratios exceed 36 percent.

That proposal sparked an outcry from not only the lending industry, but consumer organizations and civil rights groups who said it would raise the cost of borrowing for middle-class and minority homebuyers if they could not afford to make a 20 percent down payment.

“It’s unusual to see the Service Employees International Union, the AFL-CIO, NAACP, National Council of La Raza, the National Association of Consumer Advocates, and the National Consumer Law Center march arm in arm in solidarity with bankers, homebuilders, mortgage lenders, real estate agents and brokers, title companies and mortgage insurers,” Inman News columnist Ken Harney wrote of the alliance that’s organized against the QRM proposal.

Dubbed the Coalition for Sensible Housing Policy, the opposition now includes 44 consumer organizations, civil rights groups, lenders and real estate professionals, including the National Association of Realtors and the Mortgage Bankers Association.

Today, the coalition released a white paper outlining its issues with the proposed QRM definition, claiming high down payment requirements aren’t necessary for creditworthy borrowers, and that they will put homeownership out of reach for many.

House and Senate lawmakers released joint letters criticizing the proposal as too narrow, and particularly harmful to first-time and minority homebuyers.

At a press conference organized by the coalition and attended by several lawmakers, former Realtor and longtime NAR ally Senator Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., said he was “thoroughly disappointed” that regulators did not follow what he said was Congress’ legislative intent in passing the Dodd-Frank bill.

“We don’t have a down payment problem in this country, but rather an underwriting problem,” Isakson said. “I strongly urge regulators to rework their overly rigid down payment requirement for QRM. If left as is, it would make recovery in the housing market almost impossible.”

Fears overblown?

Although regulators have extended the comment period for the QRM proposal from June 10 to Aug. 1, they have defended its intent and dismissed some fears about its impacts as overblown.

The proposed QRM definition would not require that borrowers put 20 percent down — only that lenders retain 5 percent of the risk when securitizing loans with smaller down payments. The question then becomes whether loans that don’t qualify as QRM will be significantly more costly or harder to obtain than those that do.

The risk retention rules would apply to “private label” mortgage-backed securities (MBS) not backed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae. Private-label MBS — the main source of funding for subprime lenders during the boom — have been shunned by investors but are expected to re-emerge if the government winds down Fannie and Freddie.

When the QRM definition was first proposed, NAR warned that borrowers seeking non-QRM loans might pay higher fees and interest rates, totaling 3 percentage points or more.

NAR’s manager of regional economics, Ken Fears, later estimated that the difference in pricing between QRM and non-QRM loans might be as high as 2.25 percent. Last week, Fears published his latest analysis, which estimated non-QRM loans will carry rates 0.8 to 1.85 percent higher than QRM loans.

In his prepared testimony at an April 14 Congressional hearing, FDIC General Counsel Michael Krimminger said that an analysis of historical private MBS deals showed risk retention of 3 percent to 5 percent was the norm. If the market was already demanding 3 percent risk retention, the proposed rule would raise the cost of funding non-QRM loans by only 0.1 percent, the FDIC’s analysis showed.

Krimminger said that regulators envisioned that most mortgage loans — about 80 percent — would not be classified as QRMs, which would help keep down the cost of non-QRM loans.

QRM loans “will be a small slice of the market,” he said, and that will ensure that non-QRM loans will be cost effective for low- and moderate-income borrowers because they will constitute the majority of securitizations, ensuring “a vibrant and liquid secondary market.”

“The QRM exemption is meant to be just that — an exemption from the regular rules,” Krimminger said. The FDIC’s analysis of historical loan data “showed a significant relationship between higher loan-to-value ratios and increased risk of default.”

Outgoing FDIC Chairwoman Sheila Bair has a simple solution for ending the QRM debate: get rid of the QRM altogether, and apply the 5 percent risk retention requirement to all securitized mortgages.

That was the original proposal in the Dodd-Frank bill, Bair said in addressing the Council on Foreign Relations this month, American Banker reported.

“At the last minute, some in the industry got the QRM exception into the bill that basically tells the regulators to define what is the gold standard of mortgages,” Bair said. “We did that and now there’s this huge pushback on it, with the thinking being this is going to become the new normal, not just a small exception.”