3 ms·
Another way to slice those data - 33% don't have accounts, 33% (9.9 million) have just one account, and 33% have the remaining 30.1 million accounts spread betw
by stephengillie 9y ago
Another way to slice those data - 33% don't have accounts, 33% (9.9 million) have just one account, and 33% have the remaining 30.1 million accounts spread between them - on average, 3.04 accounts per person in that group, but one or two people/groups may have thousands of accounts.
Edits: Correcting math. Thanks, kbenson.
- kbenson 9y agoWell, to correct it entirely, you should probably use thirds instead of 30%, since that was either an allowance for simplicity or an error originally. I believe the correct answer is just under 3 accounts per person in the group with multiple accounts.
- r00fus 9y ago30% of the populace has 3+ accounts? That doesn't make sense - it doesn't follow power-law distribution. Most like the .01% have hundreds to thousands of accounts. What does that imply?
- lostapathy 9y agoIf somebody has hundreds or thousands of accounts, it implies they are running bots ... which I guess brings the whole argument back to the point that active humans with multiple personas are not responsible for inflation of reach stats.
- r00fus 9y agoYou're implying that identities created using persona management software [1] are bots? I guess you could though they'd likely pass a turing test. [1] https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2011/2/16/945768/- https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2011/2/16/945768/-
- lostapathy 9y agoI'm implying that if you have hundreds of accounts, you must be using software to manage it and aren't actively engaged with all of them yourself. Therefore, they are no better than bot accounts.