[jameshart]

Right. There are no ads on the "compose tweet" page

Pew analysis (based on surveying humans) says "97% of tweet volume comes from the top 25% most active tweeters"[1]

So Musk is arguing about a statistic that twitter claims, which is that spambots make up less than 5% of users.

Now, if those bots are part of the most active 25%, then they make up 1/5 of the 'most active' user population. So it seems plausible that they could well be responsible for 1/5 of tweets.

Which matches exactly what Musk is claiming - that 20% of tweets are from spam bots.

Which still makes no difference to Twitter's ability to sell Advertising targeting the 95% of users who are humans, 75/95 (=79%) of which are only responsible for 3% of tweets, but... presumably... 79% of ad revenue. Because they only serve you ads when you're looking at a feed. And that's what those users are using Twitter to do.

[1] https://www.fastcompany.com/90697826/the-top-25-most-active-...

[Helmut10001]

The famous pareto law - 80% of effects come from the top 20% of causes (users).

[Scoundreller]

I think tweet volume is the wrong approach. If they looked at tweet impressions, it would be like 0.1% of users are responsible for 99% of tweet impressions.

[Helmut10001]

I think in this case, the pareto law would need to be framed with "The top 20% of most viewed tweets are responsible for 80% of tweet impressions".