Accounts
Rank by what the profile claims or by what we measured. The two disagree by orders of magnitude, which is the whole reason both are here. Pick a topic to rescope every measured column to that niche. Defaults to the MD roster: accounts with a poll_state row, which is what distinguishes a roster member from a discovered candidate.
Ranking 0 accounts with ≥5 captured posts. Averages over one or two posts are noise, not a ranking. show everything
Filtering the full discovered table, not the roster. The two are not intersected, because roster already means country=MD and combining them would return an empty table for any other country. The polled column shows which of these are actually on a schedule.
| # | Account | Country | Tier | Top topic | Followers | Total likes | Avg plays | Eng. | ×fol | Captured |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nothing matches these filters. | ||||||||||
0 accounts
Followers are the claim; plays are the evidence. A follower count is cumulative and never decays, so it records who an account once was. @garik.ugarik holds 6,567,817 followers and averages 29,025 plays a post, 0.004 per follower, while @autoseller.chisinau holds 10,582 and averages 647,161. Sorting by followers puts the first two hundred places above the second. The ×fol column is that ratio; anything above 1× is reaching past its own following.
Capturedis how many of the account’s posts we actually hold, and every measured column is an average over exactly those posts. It is usually far below the profile’s own post count because one poll returns one page of at most 30. Lookback depth is inversely proportional to posting rate rather than a measure of the account.