There was a timeout with Grok on X, it seems. Thus, I asked it in the backend:
True.
Doing “Follow for Refollow” can actually hurt your account, especially in 2026.
Why it’s often harmful:
- Algorithm Signal X’s algorithm heavily rewards engagement rate (likes, replies, reposts, quote tweets, etc.). When you gain a lot of followers who never engage with your content, your engagement rate drops significantly. The algorithm then shows your tweets to fewer people → your reach decreases over time.
- Low-Quality Audience Most “follow for refollow” users are either:
- Other people doing growth hacking
- Inactive accounts
- Bots They don’t read your tweets, don’t buy your books, and don’t interact. This creates a very unhealthy follower-to-engagement ratio.
- Shadowban / Reduced Visibility Risk Accounts with very high follower counts but extremely low engagement are sometimes deprioritized or even lightly shadowbanned by X.
Real-World Experience (2026):
Most serious indie authors and creators who tried aggressive follow-for-refollow in the past 1–2 years reported the same thing: → Follower count went up → Impressions and real engagement went down
Better Strategy:
- Focus on organic growth through valuable content
- Actively engage with people in your niche (#WritingCommunity, #IndieAuthor, readers of your genre)
- Follow people whose content you genuinely like and interact with them meaningfully
Bottom line: Yes, follow-for-refollow usually does more harm than good in the long run. It’s much better to grow slower with real, engaged followers than fast with silent ones.
Would you like me to suggest a healthier way to grow your X account as an indie author?
Bottom line: Engagement > Follower count.
You can follow my Grok Diary in real time here: @michael_brig
