(Meta) Normally good form to append “edit” to a comment if you’re going to make a substantial modification — especially if edit changes the perception of comments that have already responded; for example, adding a source that wasn’t present before.
(Re: Source URL) Worth noting your source doesn’t appear to provide any proof that Twitter is knowingly allowing bots — or more importantly, that DemCast is using bots. What am I missing?
So, the parent comment is flagged out, but the comment was a lie. I followed up the sources, watched the videos. Teaching people how to use Twitter effectively isn't setting up a massive "bot" farm.
Based on my experience of engaging people, more likely that there’s another explanation than they were intentionally making a false statement. That said, I agree that I didn’t see any proof bots were being used, but to some people any form of automation is “robotic” or using a bot. My experience is that there’s big difference between using automated workflow off of Twitter and single person running a bot campaign on Twitter. Also hard to define “authentic” since any media campaign by default is not authentic, but huge difference between people doing something they personally support with an account they control — and doing it for money using accounts they don’t control.
__________
Edit-001:
(Meta) Normally good form to append “edit” to a comment if you’re going to make a substantial modification — especially if edit changes the perception of comments that have already responded; for example, adding a source that wasn’t present before.
(Re: Source URL) Worth noting your source doesn’t appear to provide any proof that Twitter is knowingly allowing bots — or more importantly, that DemCast is using bots. What am I missing?