Shared publicly  - 
+Mark Zuckerberg is back, baby, top Google+ user with 166,000 followers. And +Vic Gundotra is back in the listings. So's +Larry Page, +Sergey Brin & +Matt Cutts. Was it just a glitch that caused all those profiles not to show followers? C'mon gang, none of you going to tell us what was going on? EDIT: SEE THE COMMENTS BELOW; GLITCH CONFIRMED!
The irony of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg being the most followed person on Google+ is over. He's disappeared from the top rankings, along with Google CEO Larry
Anthony Brunetti's profile photoNoze P.'s profile photoDanny Sullivan's profile photoNithin Jawali's profile photo
Why does it matter? Maybe it was to show they could.
It was a trick to get Zuck out of there
A lot of excitement about a glorified glamour shot that doesn't post any content.
These are not the followers you're looking for...
I think it was to do with the whole privacy thing. When the profiles go private the data is also set to private so stat sites can no longer read it to add to their list.
+Del Williams It matters because it was freaky weird. Weird they just all dropped counts like that. Weird+1 that they just came back. Weird+2 that no one's said a word about it.

+Brian White I was worried, you know :)
The more important question is does anyone really care?
I second the movie theory. And the not caring statement.
Noze P.
Who cares anyway the man doesnt even poop online
Self confidence will replace the need to be validated by numbers. There should be an app for that.
I wish Zuck would go back to his flawed privacy violation system and let the google brothers be the kings of this + kingdom
I think it was a glitch. I was on a hangout with Michael Dell today and asked why he removed the number and he said he did not change the privacy settings.
Is it possible that it was just a glitch & not worth a formal response?
I think it was glitch - earlier on some of had problems to comment on POST - remember we are BETA users - Google plus hasn't opened the doors officially for business.
More likely the lawyers said something about it. If I had to hazard a guess, I would say Sarbanes-Oxley nonsense.
Yes - this was glitch that affected small number of people - those with very high followers and few people in their circles.
Vic, how about a setting that shows the number of followers but does not let people see who they are?
Why, exactly, would I want to follow Z when I haven't been on fb in two weeks? Is he even jumping in on any conversations on +? If not, what's the big deal? Seriously, given the dynamics of the shifting landscape right now - why would you want him in your circle? I honestly would be curious to know why those 100k people have him there...
+Adam Guerbuez You can pull facebook emails into your yahoo contacts. export them then add to google contacts. voiiilaa
Noze P.
Maybe Zuckerberg for G+ will be what Tom Anderson used to be on myspace! Your default friend lol
Why follow MZ? He's got no posts. What value does he add to anyone's network? If he has something to share, then great. If not, why bother?
I hadn't changed anything on my side recently other than following a couple dozen new people. I figured whether it was a glitch or just me being a guinea pig, it would work out fine. Looks like Vic has given the definitive reply earlier in the thread though.
+Vic Gundotra +Matt Cutts thanks for clearing that up. did kind of hope maybe it was going to start a trend. maybe we need a nofollower count friday :)
Seems like these guys were playing around with their privacy settings? Learning the old fashioned way eh?
Add a comment...