Skip to main content

Influence Tactics Analysis Results

6
Influence Tactics Score
out of 100
69% confidence
Low manipulation indicators. Content appears relatively balanced.
Optimized for English content.
Analyzed Content
X (Twitter)

kitze 💎 🙌 on X

get used to the fact that whatever i do will be 10 times better than the similar thing, i'm making it for a reasno

Posted by kitze 💎 🙌
View original →

Analysis Factors

Confidence
False Dilemmas 1/5
No presentation of only two extreme options; open-ended boast.
Us vs. Them Dynamic 1/5
No us-vs-them rhetoric; individual superiority claim without group dynamics.
Simplistic Narratives 2/5
Presents a binary 'my thing better than similar' but lacks deeper good/evil framing.
Timing Coincidence 1/5
Timing appears organic with no suspicious links to events like Minnesota ICE shooting or Syrian clashes in the past 72 hours, nor priming for hearings; casual reply in dev thread on Jan 9.
Historical Parallels 1/5
No parallels to propaganda techniques or campaigns; simple dev banter unrelated to psyops or disinformation patterns.
Financial/Political Gain 1/5
No organizations or politicians benefit; indie dev @thekitze self-promotes his project without evident paid or political backing.
Bandwagon Effect 1/5
No mention of others agreeing or widespread support; solely personal assertion.
Rapid Behavior Shifts 1/5
No urgency or pressure to change views; low-engagement post shows no astroturfing or trend momentum.
Phrase Repetition 1/5
Unique phrase with no echoes in other sources; no time-clustered amplification or coordination.
Logical Fallacies 2/5
Unsubstantiated hyperbolic claim 'whatever i do will be 10 times better' suggests overconfidence without proof.
Authority Overload 1/5
No experts, sources, or authorities cited to bolster the claim.
Cherry-Picked Data 1/5
No data or evidence presented whatsoever.
Framing Techniques 3/5
Biased self-aggrandizing language like 'get used to the fact' and '10 times better' frames the author's work as inherently superior.
Suppression of Dissent 1/5
No mention or negative labeling of critics or opposing views.
Context Omission 3/5
Omits specifics on 'the similar thing' or what 'i'm making,' and cuts off at 'reasno' (likely 'reason'), leaving claim unsubstantiated.
Novelty Overuse 1/5
Lacks claims of being unprecedented or shocking; hyperbolic '10 times better' is personal opinion, not novelty overload.
Emotional Repetition 1/5
Single short sentence with no repeated emotional words or phrases.
Manufactured Outrage 1/5
No outrage expressed or implied; disconnected from any factual controversy, purely boastful.
Urgent Action Demands 1/5
No demands for immediate action, sharing, or response; just a declarative statement.
Emotional Triggers 1/5
No fear, outrage, or guilt language present; the content is a neutral personal boast without emotional triggers.

Identified Techniques

Loaded Language Name Calling, Labeling Reductio ad hitlerum Appeal to fear-prejudice Straw Man
Was this analysis helpful?
Share this analysis
Share on X Facebook LinkedIn
Analyze Something Else