You can work with:
1. Diminishing returns: on followers counts, zaps, replies, ...
2. Looking at thread length in the replies as an indicator of real conversation beyond "GM, GM"
nostr:nprofile1qyv8wumn8ghj7enfd36x2u3wdehhxarj9emkjmn99uq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwv3sk6atn9e5k7tcprfmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuargv4ekzmt9vdshgtnfduhszxmhwden5te0w35x2en0wfjhxapwdehhxarjxyhxxmmd9uq3zamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0qyfhwumn8ghj7ur4wfcxcetsv9njuetn9uqzp22rfmsktmgpk2rtan7zwu00zuzax5maq5dnsu5g3xxvqr2u3pd7ad6wwx didn't you have a method for normalizing the effect of follower counts?
Discussion
He says they're doing all of that, but it has little discernable effect.
Probably because the deviation/spread in follower count is so humungous.
Yeah, the onboarding of most apps doesn't really help either with that humongous difference.
I'm surprised looking at thread length wouldn't have an influence. That's the first crude algo I'd use to find actual conversation (like this one)