I have personally seen output from some of these social media analyses and the results are extremely compelling. It's often dozens, hundreds, and sometimes even thousands of tweets from separate accounts, all within minutes of each other, all verbatim, including idiosyncratic grammar, punctuation, spelling errors same meme, and so on. Followed within minutes by hundreds and thousands of other accounts retweeting, quote tweeting and so on - again with the same patterns of behavior, for example quote tweets having the identical grammar, punctuation and spelling errors between different accounts while quote tweeting. Some of it is clearly automated, others may be humans working off of scripts, but it is massive and coordinated.

It truly is a huge problem. And it persists. And despite his claims, Elon Musk has virtually done nothing to solve it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw some locked thread with another half-assed "Twitter Files" story by Taibbi attacking "Hamilton68" which was an attempt to use algorithms to identify Russian bots on Twitter.

The claim seems to be that it was then used to ban a bunch of American users. Yet the list of users hasn't been made available to know whether or not they were Americans, or bots, or whatever. So we're supposed to just take Taibbi on his word?

(also - as a side note, if you don't want to be confused for a Russian bot, stop amplifying their talking points)

pretty certain that the claim is that it was erroneously used to ban users who weren’t, actually, “Russian bots.” Taibbi’s got the receipts.

If Taibbi has the receipts, he isn't coherently or convincingly delivering them.

+1

Here's a thought for you conservatives... If you don't want to be swept up and labeled as a Russian bot, maybe do a little more research and be a little more mindful and discriminating of who and what you are retweeting. I can't remember how many times I've gotten on to twitter first thing in the morning at 6AM to find some hashtag attacking dems trending - to see that it all started at 2AM, 3AM in the morning with thousands of accounts all suddenly starting to tweet then to get in the trending list. Like, sure there are all of these politically minded Americans up and caffeinated and vigorously tweeting then? Nope, but the timing aligns perfectly with the morning in St. Petersburg and Moscow, where we know for a fact that FSB, Prigozhin and others have been operating entire office complexes full of multi-story buildings filled with social media trolls working off of scripts pumping this garbage out.

Stop amplifying Russian trolls if you don't want to be mistakenly identified as one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw some locked thread with another half-assed "Twitter Files" story by Taibbi attacking "Hamilton68" which was an attempt to use algorithms to identify Russian bots on Twitter.

The claim seems to be that it was then used to ban a bunch of American users. Yet the list of users hasn't been made available to know whether or not they were Americans, or bots, or whatever. So we're supposed to just take Taibbi on his word?

(also - as a side note, if you don't want to be confused for a Russian bot, stop amplifying their talking points)

pretty certain that the claim is that it was erroneously used to ban users who weren’t, actually, “Russian bots.” Taibbi’s got the receipts.

If Taibbi has the receipts, he isn't coherently or convincingly delivering them.

Sure he is. Obviously, he can’t release all the names yet, without permission.

Don't need names, just need twitter handles... which are PUBLIC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He actually did. Named John Podesta too:

Doesn’t prove they weren’t Russian bots.

Meanwhile, there are *still* thousands of Russian bots proliferating on Twitter. Including ones pretending to be American conservative "patriots." Why isn't Taibbi addressing that?
And the fact that it's all still going on greatly, GREATLY undermines Taibbi's narrative.

Anonymous wrote:He actually did. Named John Podesta too:

Doesn’t prove they weren’t Russian bots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw some locked thread with another half-assed "Twitter Files" story by Taibbi attacking "Hamilton68" which was an attempt to use algorithms to identify Russian bots on Twitter.

The claim seems to be that it was then used to ban a bunch of American users. Yet the list of users hasn't been made available to know whether or not they were Americans, or bots, or whatever. So we're supposed to just take Taibbi on his word?

(also - as a side note, if you don't want to be confused for a Russian bot, stop amplifying their talking points)

pretty certain that the claim is that it was erroneously used to ban users who weren’t, actually, “Russian bots.” Taibbi’s got the receipts.

If Taibbi has the receipts, he isn't coherently or convincingly delivering them.

Sure he is. Obviously, he can’t release all the names yet, without permission.

He actually did. Named John Podesta too:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw some locked thread with another half-assed "Twitter Files" story by Taibbi attacking "Hamilton68" which was an attempt to use algorithms to identify Russian bots on Twitter.

The claim seems to be that it was then used to ban a bunch of American users. Yet the list of users hasn't been made available to know whether or not they were Americans, or bots, or whatever. So we're supposed to just take Taibbi on his word?

(also - as a side note, if you don't want to be confused for a Russian bot, stop amplifying their talking points)

pretty certain that the claim is that it was erroneously used to ban users who weren’t, actually, “Russian bots.” Taibbi’s got the receipts.

If Taibbi has the receipts, he isn't coherently or convincingly delivering them.

DP. You really think he's going to divulge actual names just so you can be convinced? The point is that you and your ilk need to stop calling people you disagree with and/or want to silence "Russian bots". You just look ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw some locked thread with another half-assed "Twitter Files" story by Taibbi attacking "Hamilton68" which was an attempt to use algorithms to identify Russian bots on Twitter.

The claim seems to be that it was then used to ban a bunch of American users. Yet the list of users hasn't been made available to know whether or not they were Americans, or bots, or whatever. So we're supposed to just take Taibbi on his word?

(also - as a side note, if you don't want to be confused for a Russian bot, stop amplifying their talking points)

pretty certain that the claim is that it was erroneously used to ban users who weren’t, actually, “Russian bots.” Taibbi’s got the receipts.

If Taibbi has the receipts, he isn't coherently or convincingly delivering them.

Anonymous wrote:Saw some locked thread with another half-assed "Twitter Files" story by Taibbi attacking "Hamilton68" which was an attempt to use algorithms to identify Russian bots on Twitter.

The claim seems to be that it was then used to ban a bunch of American users. Yet the list of users hasn't been made available to know whether or not they were Americans, or bots, or whatever. So we're supposed to just take Taibbi on his word?

(also - as a side note, if you don't want to be confused for a Russian bot, stop amplifying their talking points)

pretty certain that the claim is that it was erroneously used to ban users who weren’t, actually, “Russian bots.” Taibbi’s got the receipts.

Saw some locked thread with another half-assed "Twitter Files" story by Taibbi attacking "Hamilton68" which was an attempt to use algorithms to identify Russian bots on Twitter.

The claim seems to be that it was then used to ban a bunch of American users. Yet the list of users hasn't been made available to know whether or not they were Americans, or bots, or whatever. So we're supposed to just take Taibbi on his word?

(also - as a side note, if you don't want to be confused for a Russian bot, stop amplifying their talking points)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am a frequent Twitter user and the only difference I've noticed is that some far-left folks promoted Mastodon for a while and then left...only to come back.

Cool story bro. Mastodon is still gaining users in droves and many Twitter accounts are reporting they've lost as much as 25% of their regular users. And no, it's not bots getting cleaned out, because I'm seeing nonstop instances of bots all over Twitter. Not to mention, people getting annoyed with the huge increase in advertising tweets and being flooded with non-relevant tweets from accounts they didn't follow.

How is that different from Twitter before Elon?

Uhh what? Are you seriously asking how it's different, as if nothing's changed?

Prior to Elon taking over Twitter, there weren't millions of users leaving for Masdodon.
Prior to Elon taking over, the bots were bad, but not as bad as they are now
Prior to Elon taking over, users had more control over which accounts and content they saw, instead of being bombarded with tweets from accounts they don't even follow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am a frequent Twitter user and the only difference I've noticed is that some far-left folks promoted Mastodon for a while and then left...only to come back.

Cool story bro. Mastodon is still gaining users in droves and many Twitter accounts are reporting they've lost as much as 25% of their regular users. And no, it's not bots getting cleaned out, because I'm seeing nonstop instances of bots all over Twitter. Not to mention, people getting annoyed with the huge increase in advertising tweets and being flooded with non-relevant tweets from accounts they didn't follow.

How is that different from Twitter before Elon?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^So much lying and obfuscation on DCUM^*

In the first week of January 2023, the number of active users on Mastodon hovered around the 1.8 million mark, compared to the around 2.5 million active users that the platform had at the beginning of December last year.

Twitter's user count is expected to grow upwards of 335 million in 2023.

Look at you talking about "lying and obfuscation" while YOU peddle an entirely fake claim pretending Mastodon has dropped from 2.5 million in December to 1.8 million now and that users are leaving in droves. Who told you that? Elon?
Reality is that Mastodon grew from less than 1 million before Elon took over Twitter to 9 million now and continues to grow.

https://pathofex.com/mastodon-user-count/

Is the mastodon user base smaller than Twitter? Absolutely. But is it shrinking, are users bailing in droves to go back to Twitter? Absolutely not.

Drop the lies and attempts at obfuscating the truth.
My source is The Guardian, Sat Jan 7 2023:
"The number of active users on the Mastondon social network has dropped more than 30% since the peak and is continuing a slow decline, according to the data posted on its website. There were about 1.8 million active users in the first week of January, down from over 2.5 million in early December."

Guardian is wrong and their count is faulty. Mastodon is a federated network with over 9 million active users.

Here is some actual data as reported by live servers, as opposed to made-up statistics.
The full Fediverse has over 9.5 million users. https://the-federation.info/
Mastodon servers account for nearly 8 million of those users. https://the-federation.info/platform/21
And there has not even remotely been a "30% drop"

Guardian article is definitely wrong.

Meanwhile reported Twitter user counts are notoriously wrong - https://mashable.com/article/twitter-miscounted-users