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 →

Tony Stubblebine no published score: only 2 usable exchanges 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 ✕
2exchanges match
2on raw tape
0redirected or not addressed
Answered raw tape D 5 · C 5 · P 4 · Cm 4 4.60

Q Are you seeing a real increase in this type of content showing up on medium because of the scale?

A We saw like a 10 X increase in what people were trying to post on medium. But also at some level, it was kind of a non-issue because the tools we used to battle it are the same tools we were already using to, um, to battle spam and to filter out the filter, the good stuff into the network and leave the bad stuff out. So we got a huge increase, uh, in volume, but not in what the readers see. And I still, I'm like somewhat perplexed that that article made it to print because it was really, A nothing burger for us. It just, it was a little bit of extra work, but the same type of work we were already doing.

AI assessment note: “We saw like a 10 X increase in what people were trying to post”

Answered raw tape D 5 · C 4 · P 3 · Cm 3 3.90

Q It's funny you say, uh, we got an increase. Uh, is that increase still being sustained that 10 X increase?

A Yeah. It didn't, it didn't turn out to be exponential. It just, it came and, uh, I think we tightened up, uh, um, and maybe became less interesting, but you know, it's like the, it was just a step function and the change in price and that, that, um, there's not a, As significant of a change in price to create that slop anymore, and, you know, it gets incrementally cheaper, but it's still, like, it was somewhat cheap, and then it became very cheap, and that's just like night and day, and that night and day, I think, just created a one-time change in the amount of trash that was getting thrown at platforms, and I think that's true for all platforms.

AI assessment note: “Yeah. It didn't, it didn't turn out to be exponential. It was just a step function”

page 1
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 300 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.