[benterix]

As this subject is interesting to me, I decided to read one of your articles to understand where you are coming from. And I came across this part[0]:

> The cited evidence is two men who joined the Lithuanian Rifleman’s Union, an organisation with a stable membership of around 10,000 people (0.3% of the population). ... The article presents no data or other evidence to suggest behavioural changes in the Lithuanian population: the anecdote of two people is generalised to the entire country.

So I checked the article and it says:

> "We are growing dramatically in numbers. Three years ago we had 50 people in Vilnius - now we have 3,000."

and then:

> Some 4,000 troops are being shipped out to the region - with 1,000 German soldiers allocated to Lithuania.

So while I believe your engagement in bot detection is genuine and you can offer some useful insights into how some bot detection platform are broken, as for the field reporting, forgive me but I still trust more traditional journalists than you, in spite of living on this Earth long enough to realize everything is imperfect.

[0] https://blog.plan99.net/правда-6e24757a67ba

[mike_hearn]

The part about the troops isn't relevant given that it's a story about a civilian militia and troops is a reference to a professional army. Still, it looks like you're right about the recruiting. This was written seven years ago, guess I didn't spot the quote about their growth. I'll remove that story and add a note to the bottom. There will still be 15 examples which is plenty to make the point, especially as that's the least important example.

> I still trust more traditional journalists than you

By all means, trust who you want! But bear in mind you could easily check these examples because there are links and sources for everything, something journalists often don't provide. For example, the Reuters story in the parent post about "Peace Data" doesn't seem to have any links at all.