That, in turn, is testament that absent having both volume and forensics that, say, FB has, this project relies on personal judgment.
I agree 53% is fishy. In part a testament to arbitrary # of somewhat arbitrary accounts that are nevertheless too small to show real trend
-
-
-
The personal judgment of some (by no means all) of those involved in this project has proven suspect in the past, & Hannity
#s confirm that. -
Personal judgment aspect ALSO means you'll never have an "n" large enough to be meaningful. So stupid project, imo.
-
FB, incidentally, suggests the claims that trends driven by bots overrated (others back that too). So who defines a "troll"?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.