Is my name on it?
Yes?
Then it's personal information, and those "real users" can go screw.
Yes?
Then it's personal information, and those "real users" can go screw.
Klout is just a (lame) algorithm talking about you on the Internet.
The idea of people having an expectation of privacy in a broadcast medium feels preposterous to me.
This isn't specific to the internet. This is how the meat world works.
The bigger problem, of course, is that they assert that I "[am] on Klout," when I damned well am not. A page that they have scraped from services that actually provide meaningful value has information about me on it, but I am not "on" their site in any meaningful way. They co-opt my online presence (not that it's worth much) to attempt to drive my acquaintances to use their service, when their service isn't even one I use.
But, y'know. Ignoring the people whose data you're scraping and lying about their use of your service is just real ingenious hustling, or...something. I've lost track of the various ways people excuse terrible behavior like this from trendy companies.
If you left all your possessions in the middle of the nearest town, would it surprise you if they were stolen? Of course we want to live in a world where that doesn't happen but the reality is that we don't. If you don't want people to abuse your personal information, don't make your personal information public.
You are not entitled to use my information to push your service unless I agree to allow you to do so (for example, by virtue of using your service). This just isn't that complex.
EDIT: There's an argument that Klout is possibly violating Twitter's Terms of Service, too:
C. Your Service should not:
...
impersonate or facilitate impersonation of others in a manner that can mislead, confuse, or deceive users.
I'm pretty sure that "look, this person you know is 'on' Klout!" when I have and desire no relationship with their service would fall under this category (or would if Twitter actually enforced such rules, which it doesn't appear they do). "But we just say 'on' to mean 'we have some stuff about them!'" is unacceptable. Doubly so when they won't stop when asked. But user abuse seems to be endemic to the "social" industry, so while I'm kind of pissed, I'm not surprised.
> Twitter gives them access to my public timeline. That's fine.
> There's an argument that Klout is possibly violating Twitter's Terms of Service, too
See, if Twitter gives them permission to do something, and they do it, then they have permission to do it. It's sleazy in how they do it, but, as you say: whatever.
Here is the unfortunate thing. Twitter is allowing them to do this. Klout has permission. And, by using Twitter, you are in a sense giving Klout permission as well, through that nefarious ToS.
You want to use Twitter? A part of using Twitter is allowing them to provide your information to Klout. There is nothing to say you have to use Twitter. There are other options out there.
A lot of this seems to be entitlement-driven. You want something for free, but you dislike the terms. You are allowed to disagree with those terms, but don't misplace the blame here.
You gave Twitter certain permissions. Twitter then uses those permissions and does with it what it will, which results in allow Klout to do what it will (and don't for a minute think that Twitter's public ToS is the only ToS). You've given your permission. It strikes me as wrong to attack Klout, who has Twitter's permission, and by extension, yours.
Complain if you will, but understand that Twitter is at the centre of this. If you complain about Klout and leave Twitter blameless, you're being dishonest.
If you can't agree to the ToS, don't use the service.
And, no, sorry, there are no other alternatives to Twitter. Literally zero. I mean, really--identi.ca? Don't make me laugh.
This is not to say that I'm a fan of Klout - quite the contrary - but to give away information and then expect to be able to control how it's used is, sadly, unrealistic. As I said, we may wish there weren't such people in the world, but there are, and we have to take responsibility for looking after our own interests rather than hoping some faceless third party will do it for us.