Elouina Finds Liberal Twitter Bot Network

originally posted by: Idreamofme
a reply to: elouina

You have the most interesting threads. Every time. You win. Im jealous of you. But thats a compliment.

Looking back on this member's threads...most were not correct. Interesting, I will give you that.

a reply to: elouina

How about you explain your methodology because I looked at what your friend is posting and I checked a few accounts at random and they're clearly not bot accounts. I mean clearly not. Then there were some that appeared to be bots but like this one with 932k tweets, they're not "liberal" at all.

Take a look for yourself.

It seems to be retweeting RT, China Xinhua News, Press TV‏, The Economic Times, Drudge Report, Fox News, ZeroHedge and others. Pretty much in that order. I did notice one retweet of an article from IBT.

So perhaps you could go into some detail here. And please, don't hold back on the technical detail, I'm more than qualified to discuss the finer points.

a reply to: reldra

You must be joking. Trump doesn't need "fake" followers. He's got 27 million followers because his tweets are a phenomenon that even his greatest rivals can't fathom. He has millions of followers for very obvious reasons.

What a weird comment. Not un-expected of course. Even if CNN or Buzzfeed reported on the OP correctly, I am of the opinion that you would still defend it (twitter lefty bots) to the hilt. That's what serious brainwashing does.

a reply to: Annee

He knows it's not one sided. But that's the narrative that he wants to push. He's a propagandist like probably half the members accounts on here now.

a reply to: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Wookiep
a reply to: reldra

You must be joking. Trump doesn't need "fake" followers. He's got 27 million followers because his tweets are a phenomenon that even his greatest rivals can't fathom. He has millions of followers for very obvious reasons.

What a weird comment. Not un-expected of course. Even if CNN or Buzzfeed reported on the OP correctly, I am of the opinion that you would still defend it (twitter lefty bots) to the hilt. That's what serious brainwashing does.

A percent of the 27 million are not real. It is the same for him and most politicians and celebrities.

a reply to: reldra

Ive been known to be wrong a time or two. So you may be correct. I just think elouisa does a good job and peaks my interest. I mean lately. Havent went through all elouisas threads. But he/she is at least contributing. Dont pee in my cheerios mr. Grinch

originally posted by: Idreamofme
a reply to: reldra

Ive been known to be wrong a time or two. So you may be correct. I just think elouisa does a good job and peaks my interest. I mean lately. Havent went through all elouisas threads. But he/she is at least contributing. Dont pee in my cheerios mr. Grinch

As I say, interesting, yes. But I have looked. So, the skepticism level is high.

Ok, I will attempt to not pee in the Cheerios. Sorry.

originally posted by: Idreamofme
a reply to: reldra

Ive been known to be wrong a time or two. So you may be correct. I just think elouisa does a good job and peaks my interest. I mean lately. Havent went through all elouisas threads. But he/she is at least contributing. Dont pee in my cheerios mr. Grinch

I wish this was put in the mud pit at this point for certain reasons, but do not let that one steer you too far away. There are reasons I won't get into it at this time.

originally posted by: Wookiep

originally posted by: Idreamofme
a reply to: reldra

Ive been known to be wrong a time or two. So you may be correct. I just think elouisa does a good job and peaks my interest. I mean lately. Havent went through all elouisas threads. But he/she is at least contributing. Dont pee in my cheerios mr. Grinch

I wish this was put in the mud pit at this point for certain reasons, but do not let that one steer you too far away. There are reasons I won't get into at this time.

I would love a put pit. Mini Golf is not the same without one.

aww, you caught it.

originally posted by: Wookiep

originally posted by: Idreamofme
a reply to: reldra

Ive been known to be wrong a time or two. So you may be correct. I just think elouisa does a good job and peaks my interest. I mean lately. Havent went through all elouisas threads. But he/she is at least contributing. Dont pee in my cheerios mr. Grinch

I wish this was put in the mud pit at this point for certain reasons, but do not let that one steer you too far away. There are reasons I won't get into at this time.

Which one? If you want it in mud pit, you can make a second thread on the topic in mud pit. It is within the rules.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: elouina

Most audited Twitter accounts have fake followers. Trump's numbers of fake followers are probably highest. You can buy active followers for Twitter, FB, Instagram. Most are not bot networks. They are actually people paid to follow and then make useful comments.

Here you go, I am a data kind of gal.

a reply to: elouina

Allright, so according to the ONE source, 82% of Obama's followers are real and 95% of Trump followers.

I am not sure I believe that source for either one.

Trump's may be higher since his tweets have been most followed and will be followed by people that hate him. Obama barely tweeted.




If someone was buying followers, I would bet on Trump. Obama didn;t care much for twitter.

As for how it is indicated that followers are real or not, they have to be active on twitter, follow some number of people and have some number of people following them.

There are a lot of paid followers that fall into that category and are not counted as false.


I am not very active on twitter. I follow, for example, Michelle Obama. I follow about 20 people. I think 5 people follow me. I might be counted as a 'false' follower of Michelle Obama because I don't type a lot on twitter.

a reply to: theantediluvian

They are retweeting the bots, an elaborate setup of coordinated retweets and follows. Look at my top post, "Liberal Twitter Retweet/Follower Bot Network". That person that you listed doesn't mention any political affiliation, but obviously has one.

a reply to: elouina

They are retweeting the bots

Wouldn't that create a feedback loop?

Bots retweetng bots retweeting bots retweeting bots...
I

a reply to: elouina

These programs or 'type in' to see how many real followers only look at certain things.

1) Does the person actively type on twitter
2) Does the person follow X number of people and have X number of followers
3) Does the person have a reasonable profile.

again

I am not very active on twitter. I follow, for example, Michelle Obama. I follow about 20 people. I think 5 people follow me. I might be counted as a 'false' follower of Michelle Obama because I don't type a lot on twitter.

I may retweet something something that is a bot without knowing. I rarely retweet, but many people may have retweeted the bot's tweet.

It is very difficult to count who is a bot or a paid tweeter or a real person that just is not very active.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I know a guy who can get you 1000 phone verified Twitter accounts from Russians on the black market for a couple hundred bucks. Social media is lousy with bots and troll farm frauds no doubt. Buying automatic retweets is clearly a thing. I'm sure the bot in my last post isn't retweeting Fox News and RT for nothing.

Hey, did you get any of those undercover videos of Breitbart coordinating their efforts with Aaron Minter to disrupt Marco Rubio appearances yet? No? Me neither.

According to whatever method they're using on the site, Twitteraudit.com is saying this about @realDonaldTrump:

16,606,106 Real
6,110,865 Fake

How about @CNNand @FoxNews and @MSNBC?

CNN:

17,240,311 Real (54%)
14,804,876 Fake

Fox:

6,123,461 Real (50%)
6,222,226 Fake

MSNBC beats them both:

575,580 Real (67%)
280,938 Fake

It's not clear how they arrive at that estimate but judging by what I've seen following the OP's links, I certainly hope they're doing something... else.

a reply to: reldra

Imagine when sentient AIs will be unleashed online. Then we will truly be lost between what is real,fake,bot etc..

originally posted by: Elementone
a reply to: reldra

Imagine when sentient AIs will be unleashed online. Then we will truly be lost between what is real,fake,bot etc..

Bots and paid followers are about the same. They might get better at making a reasonable twitter account, but that will take about 20 years and twitter may not even exist then.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: elouina

They are retweeting the bots

Wouldn't that create a feedback loop?

Bots retweetng bots retweeting bots retweeting bots...
I

Nooo.... Humans are retweeting the bots.