So following on my conversation with the Devil on my Brand Republic Blog, I’ve modelled sane vs insane blog postings and comments derived from a viral campaign (or in fact anything that remotely generates conversation). I’ve called this the “Bell Curve of insanity” as I reckon the sane vs insane ratio of blog comments about a viral follows a normal distribution model . . .
And if you missed the inspiration for this modeling, check out “the insane” Devil Worshipping comment one our campaigns recently inspired . . .
How does this compare with the chart I found?
http://www.rubberrepublic.com/blog/blog/2009/09/outliers/
Yes, I am fond of the graph Andy posted (that RR had posted months ago). The x-axis can be either “Left-Right” or “Agree-Disagree”. Note that you need to define where the peak of the curve is: is it defined in absolute terms or relative to the post itself?
Note also that the far-Agree people will comment as much as the far-Disagree people. Often they do so to rebut a far-Disagree comment. Further, it’s infrequent that a far-Agree person will make as cogent or rational an argument on the issue at hand as the original post — they are so far on the Agree side that they take the original post as dogma and any dissent as heresy. Thus, you have insane zealots hurting your case as they try to rebut insane devil-worshipers. The far-Agree tend to be the most susceptible to trolling too, creating hysterical responses that are even more harmful. Oh, the fun!
You also need to add a shaded area on the top of the curve… the many people who will post “True dat” or “I agree” with some level of “I agree, but you need to add/clarify something.” Typically, these responses are short and rational, with rational defined by having the original post be considered the peak of the curve.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Rubber Republic, Rubber Republic and The peeps @ AMCO, The Delib Team. The Delib Team said: The Bell Curve of Insanity – sane vs Insane blog comments modelled in a graph http://bit.ly/amSy42 [...]