A word of warning. You think you're curating it yourself, but the discovery mechanisms are algorithmically biased towards finding you an opinion you already agree with.
This is why a) social media is often characterised as a narcissistic echo chamber, and b) why it becomes so rapidly toxic when two naturally opposed communities coincide on a topic.
A wonderful petri dish for anthropologists, but not a medium we'll be proud of fifty years from now.
> ...the discovery mechanisms are algorithmically biased...
That depends entirely on how you use Twitter.
Find people you know or have heard of other places and think are smart/interesting/important/etc. Follow people they retweet. Repeat. Meet Kevin Bacon.
Fighting human psycology, sociology, and site design through individual conscious will scales poorly.
Your friends and FOAFs are not likely to exercise the same level of control as you're expressing. I've consistently observed this even among a carefully curated set of sources on several SocMed sites.
This is why a) social media is often characterised as a narcissistic echo chamber, and b) why it becomes so rapidly toxic when two naturally opposed communities coincide on a topic.
A wonderful petri dish for anthropologists, but not a medium we'll be proud of fifty years from now.