41
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 04:12:11 AM »
I'm just typing out quick responses cause I don't have time for your bullshit
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
42
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 04:00:07 AM »
You guys are crazy. My argument is that a lot of his likes are not genuine. Turns out this is true. He posted the evidence himself.
43
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 02:07:33 AM »I urge everone not to use Facebook.Like
44
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:37:27 AM »Nigeria is a click farm country so no, you're wrong. No big deal though. This site is obviously important.Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
None of the numbers match your argument, which honestly points to it being a shitty argument. Furthermore, the Flat Earth Society is more likely to be more popular with less educated countries but those which have a great deal of Internet access (Nigeria).
45
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:30:10 AM »
Its not a shitty argument. Its a worthwhile consideration that you are actually a victim of. Not all the likes are the result of it but its apparent that a large portion are.
46
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:21:15 AM »
In any case, glad the site is doing well. Seriously.
47
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:20:51 AM »
Maybe posts are hidden or something.
48
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:15:43 AM »
All 21 social interactions.
49
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:12:37 AM »
What the fuck are you talking about? I brought up SEO because the fact that it is easier to find the old site makes it seem less likely that your site is more popular than the old one.
50
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:09:09 AM »
Looks like click farm stats to me. By the way I know that their domain reputation is higher than yours. That was precisely my point.
51
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:04:25 AM »
Also, it could be that you are right and they are genuine, which is fine by me. I just wanted to see if you had entertained the possibility. It just doesn't seem likely that your site is genuinely more popular than the old one because when you do an incognito search on google the old site is first and because I don't see random noobies here but they are aplenty over there.
52
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 12:57:44 AM »Oh so now you think Lagos is the only place that has like farms? I can only imagine what the rest of those analytics look like. Maybe you could end this by just taking a screenshot. Show all those likes that cone from countries that actually use the internet.Turns out it is 21.Nope.
You're also missing the part where by "most" you meant "10%".
53
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 12:56:07 AM »Look, this is just like that time when you said it's impossible to spoof an e-mail. Go do your 20 minutes of research and save us all some time.What is relevant about that? Are you saying Tapatalk spoofed emails?
54
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 12:53:14 AM »I'm sorry I didn't count very thoroughly. Its hard to view the full site from a mobile device. Turns out it is 21. That definitely changes everythingThere is what, 6 comments total?No.
55
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 12:49:32 AM »There is what, 6 comments total? Come on.Ah so you didn't learn how you can tell from the video.I did. As the cool dude from the pop science channel said, what matters is engagement. That's why I'm comparing engagement. I'm not going to click on 3000 profiles (or 300 profiles, to get a meaningful sample) and check if they like random crap. I don't need to do that, because I don't care about the percentage as a number. I care about proportions.
Also, you may enjoy this: http://www.jonloomer.com/2014/02/11/facebook-fraud-response/I did look at the page and it seems that most of your insights come from Lagos, Nigeria. Boy that sounds genuine.Considering that we get comments from those people, yes, it does.
56
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 12:44:54 AM »
I did look at the page and it seems that most of your insights come from Lagos, Nigeria. Boy that sounds genuine.
57
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 12:39:56 AM »Ah so you didn't learn how you can tell from the video.Wow. So how do you know that your likes are genuine again?Let's try this once again. Since the ratio of likes to approximate engagement for each page is similar, it stands to reason that the percentage of "genuine" likes on each page is similar.
58
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 12:38:11 AM »
Wow. So how do you know that your likes are genuine again?
59
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 12:34:58 AM »Because I asked you how you know and you didn't have a response that sounded like you know. You also edited your initial response.Huh? First of all why did you move this? You touted Facebook likes and then I pointed out that they might not be genuine.Because you were turning a side comment into the subject of an ongoing serious discussion. Do not derail S&C threads. If you think others (in this case, arguably myself) have derailed an S&C thread, do not derail S&C threads anyway.Then you said they are and you don't even know how to tell if they are genuine or not even though the video shows you how.How do you know what I do or do not know? As I said, the engagement of each page is largely proportional to the amount of likes, ergo it speaks to reason that we are equally affected (or not affected) by the issue. You are harping about a non-factor, as usual.
I'm harping on as usual? Please. I'm bringing to light the fact that Daniel has no reason at all to concede to what anyone is proposing and you somehow think you do because of some Facebook likes?
60
Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud
« on: July 20, 2014, 12:30:21 AM »
And actually yes they can be more sure about their likes than you can because your likes are recent and this is a recent phenomenon happening most often with new pages.