One slightly problematic aspect of their methodology is that 'Casey ... [found] 8,555 to have an overlap of features highly correlated with fake/spam accounts'.

One slightly problematic aspect of their methodology is that 'Casey ... [found] 8,555 to have an overlap of features highly correlated with fake/spam accounts'. Which features were they? How reliable are those features? What method was used to overlap the features? What thresholds within that method were used to classify the overlap(s) as spam, or not spam? Unfortunately this research, while compelling, fails the falsifiability test.