The Exchanges

Every argument clarity score on this site is built from rows on this page. Each question and answer was assessed with names hidden, the host's own answers included, on four things from 1 to 5: directness (does it answer the question asked), coherence (do the ideas follow), precision (concrete details and clear references), compression (says a lot per word). The weighted mix (30/30/25/15) is the exchange score. A person's published score averages their exchange scores on raw tape only, at least 8 of them, shrunk toward the cohort mean. Full method →

Michael Shellenberger no published score: only 1 usable exchange on raw tape, and a fair score needs 8+ record → ← everyone

Every exchange below was scored with names hidden, four dimensions each from 1 to 5. An exchange's score is 0.30·directness + 0.30·coherence + 0.25·precision + 0.15·compression. The published score averages the raw tape exchange scores and shrinks small samples toward the cohort mean, so five great answers can't beat twenty good ones. Produced feed rows count only toward coarse estimates, never toward a full score.

clear all ✕
1exchanges match
1on raw tape
0redirected or not addressed
Answered raw tape D 4 · C 4 · P 4 · Cm 3 3.85

Q Yeah, exactly. This was all in the backdrop of Trump asking for the Russians, you know, during that debate to hack Hillary, for him interfering with Zelensky and trying to get him to give dirt on Biden, and the fact that Hunter Biden was obviously dirty. So to expect a hack There was massive precedent for it, so that set the stage for this, correct?

A For sure, and there is definitely, uh, that going on, and maybe that's all there was to it, It is just striking, of course, because, and I didn't even mention in my, this was, by the way, this is Twitter thread, uh, part seven that I did on this issue. Um, I didn't even get into the fact that, you know, within a few days, the many, uh, former senior, uh, heads of intelligence organizations and others came out and said that it was the result of a Russian disinformation campaign. So yeah, sure. I mean, I guess we could find some other explanation, uh, for it. Um, whether it was innocent or coordinated, but it is, it is striking. Also, I think the other thing that we found was the contrast between the, the threat inflation and what, what Twitter was finding themselves. I mean, there was, you know, you'll repeatedly, you'll Roth would, would respond to FBI that, yeah, we looked into these accounts that you mentioned, and they were all very low follower accounts with very little activity. So they just weren't finding very much foreign influence on the Twitter platform. And so I just think it was grossly inflated either for kind of good reasons or bad reasons, I would say. Yeah.

AI assessment note: “For sure, and there is definitely, uh, that going on”

page 1
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 460 episodes transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.