Gimmick Post Independent Research And Verification

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

It appears I'm getting booped.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

@psychicdamage-identified ?

I have no experience or education in the field of psychology beyond being severely schizophrenic. As such @psychicdamage-identified's rating will be decided via democratic vote.

Verification?

Accurate.

Likely Accurate.

Dubious.

Likely Inaccurate.

Inaccurate.

Unique.

Voting ended onNov 26, 2023

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

Hey, everyone. While I like writing on whole blogs and researching their posts, it is a much more tedious and time consuming thing than looking into individual posts from said blogs. I currently have a very severe viral infection which has further restrained me, so if you're looking to send me blogs or topics to discuss, please try and narrow it down to a few specific posts, especially if they stand out as dubious. That being said, do still feel free to send me topics in general! I genuinely enjoy doing this, it's just my current backlog & inbox consists mostly of whole blogs, which are much more daunting to my 102° fevered brain.

I caught this virus in an Arby's, which is really unfortunate. It's sad to suffer, because of Arby's.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

thoughts on @i-count-words-in-posts?

Sorry for the late response, I searched through (I believe) every post on @i-count-words-in-posts to compile a list of all oddities and inconsistencies, however I came to the boring conclusion that this gimmick blog has fully consistent rules - only counting words within the post contents (not any attachments, tags or user IDs) and counting hyphenated words as two words.

I suppose that makes this blog verified, by the moderators' own rules? I won't give the rating, though, as it is a somewhat opinionated way to count words within posts.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

I made you fanart. Feel free to use it as a pfp! :D

Thank you! I will do that!

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

@the-style-look-every-episode ?

This was extremely confusing to me, initially I thought it was attempting to wordlessly document the art style of South Park and how it evolved + in which episodes it did so, but then I realized this blog has screenshots from nearly every episode. I was going to attempt to explain how the digital puppetry-type animation of South Park works and how that makes the style inherently consistent following any major changes due to reused frames, thus making examining every episode somewhat arbitrary, but then after 40 posts I realized the characters Stan and Kyle are in every screenshot. It doesn't mean "style" like the art concept, it means Stan + Kyle. It's attempting to catalogue scenes in which Stan and Kyle stand next to each other in every shared episode. I don't particularly want to watch every episode of South Park to verify this. You win this time.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

I meant to queue that last post. I don't intent to respond to every suggestion the moment I receive them, if only to make this blog easier to follow.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

i recommend checking out @colortracker because it would be funny to see you fight him over colors in his posts

Gimmick Post Verification Status: UNIQUE (see below)

The gimmick blog @colortracker is a human-run blog that examines post contents, most often images but also other forms of visual content such as gifs and videos, and attempts to roughly quantify how many colors are present. According to the blog's pinned post, only the colors red, orange, yellow, green, blue, purple, pink, and gray are counted. Each post receives a score out of 8, the score representing how many of the aforementioned colors are present in the content.

From observations, this blog seemingly builds controversy, intentionally or otherwise, due to the issue of color identification bias. This is a problem that effects several fields of research, study, software development, and even fashion design and marketing. Generally speaking, "objective" color identifications are bad. Human vision and perception is an extremely complicated topic, and humans don't visually process 100% of the information they are seeing, including color. Color is mostly an approximation, your brain kinda "guesses" what color is the "most" apparent or applicable in any instance. The first half of this video ("What Color Is My Hoodie?") by Tom Scott is a good launching point for understanding color perception.

The reason I am giving all of this context and information is to demonstrate that color is, objectively, subjective. "Objective" colors are less useful in practical fields than the general consensus (source is the same as in the first sourced statement). I cannot use a precise color code identifier to dispute this gimmick blog, because color is an example of qualia. I could easily squash and stretch any image, pick out individual pixels and especially use generation loss and compression (a whole other topic that also relates to this blog) to show "definitive" proof that, on my monitor, the "True Blue" theme of Tumblr contains bright red. Alternatively, I could link to an article from when "The Dress" was a meme.

Controversy relating to this blog's determinations & objective/subjective colors are also influenced by Alexis Spectral Data and the digital imaging concept of color management.

On a less subjective note, this particular post contains a formatting error, where two additional colors, likely yellow and purple, are counted in the score but not listed in the post content.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

Can you verify @iwanttokillsupermario and see if they're hatred is real? As their blogs creation was at least from what I can tell AFTER (the very genuine) @iwanttohavesexwithsupermario which seems a bit suspicious however I'm not fully convinced that it isn't real

I am incredibly autistic - I have, through various careers and college certificate classes, experience in web archival research, independent investigation, business economics, and advertising / marketing, however I also have an exceptionally poor grasp on psychology, emotions, and the human condition. For this reason, I'm much better at demonstrating when false or misleading information is or isn't being shared and, if it is, why.

That being said, 15 minutes on each blog gives me the impression that @iwanttohavesexwithsupermario is much too personal and honest about the real-world effects of wanting to have sex with Super Mario, whereas @iwanttokillsupermario seems to moreso have a general, perhaps even healthy disdain towards bland, safe, mascot-type characters which is either intentionally or subconsciously being exasperated due to the inherent humor of managing a gimmick blog, especially in a space where multiple adjacent blogs interact with you.

To be more specific: I doubt anyone making an absurd sexual statement just for the inherent humor of it, with zero genuine attraction, would continue to post about it when a large amount of their followers become r/AITA commenters reacting to a small argument over a glass of fancy wine being spilled with petitions for divorce. Obviously whatever attraction is being felt is being exasperated, heavily even, for comedic purposes.

Likewise, I doubt anyone who holds a genuine, unhealthy hatred towards a fictional character could manage a 100% serious blog solely dedicated to said hatred on the fandom epicenter of the internet without becoming a terrorist.

iwanttohavesexwithsupermario Gimmick Post Verification Status: LIKELY ACCURATE

iwanttokillsupermario Gimmick Post Verification Status: LIKELY ACCURATE

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

is this a gimmick blog?

Comically (comparatively) thorough investigation into extremely mundane and hyperspecific topics is a gimmick, I think. I won't rate myself, however.

The main purpose of this blog is to demonstrate how easy it is to take information at face value, regardless of who's the source. Trivia serves as a notorious channel for misinformation in all forms, even in situations like gimmick blogs sharing mundane facts about individual posts - in 2008, as a joke, a 17-year-old added trivia to the Wikipedia page for the coati stating that they're also known as the "Brazilian aardvark." This claim eventually circulated to the point that it became a genuine and accepted alternative name, until eventually the unsourced trivia from 2008 was able to source itself to an article from 2010, that sourced the trivia from 2008. Perhaps that's a bad example, as depending on your view on information and etymology that could be a wholly valid origin for a common name. Additionally I believe many people would disregard that specific example due to it being "badass" and "wicked funny." Misinfo is a complicated subject.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

@your-fave-is-being-blended pls

"Your fave is (x)" blogs are inherently unverifiable as they mostly are used to express headcanon or fan theories, although there are instances of a character actually fitting the criteria. In this instance, however, this blog is clearly a joke - or, at least, is moreso referring to the mental process of "blending" your fave; absurd or extreme statements meant to represent or demonstrate obsession. For all of these reasons, I probably wouldn't do into depth on a "your fave"-type gimmick blog, unless they claim to be presenting exclusively canonical information.

In the instance of this specific blog, it's doubly difficult to verify, as I highly doubt there's any posts meeting both criteria. I say both, as not only is it stating a person, place or thing is being blended, it's stating such in the present tense. This works for states of being or mindsets / ideology, I.E. "your fave is transgender" "your fave has scoliosis" "your fave loves you" etc, however "being blended" is, inherently, an action. In addition, this blog has no gripes with depicting real-life individuals, so, like, damn, I guess I can't say they for sure aren't, I'm not looking at them, but, fuck, I sure hope they're not.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

Hey ! I have beta access to Collections and I was in the process of making a Gimmick blogs collection to share with the world. If you have a list of such blogs, I'd be glad to add them !

I mostly look at a random post for any gimmick blog I come across or I'm sent and start researching it, I don't have an extensive list currently. I'll make sure to catalog every blog I post about in the tags, however.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

Could you verify the blog @i-say-ok ?

I'm not sure if it is genuine...

My initial thought was to check every post and reblog on this blog to see if anything other than "ok." has ever been posted, however this blog has seemingly been used as a personal blog for almost a year now with well over 3,000 posts, so instead I just spent an hour scrolling through each month on the Archive page. My hope was to create a spreadsheet, but this is the best I could do in my time.

Semantically, you could argue that from their first reblog they said something other thank "ok", that being "ok." with a period, but it's obvious the goal of this blog is just to respond to everything with a variation on "ok" and not exclusively "ok" in lowercase with no formatting. However, they have in the past used words other than "ok" in the tags when contextually appropriate (f-slur in source). The full list of words they've said in the tags, according to the Tumblr Archive page from Dec 3 2022 to Oct 27 2023, are as follow:

bugs

cw

eyestrain

f

flash

flashing

long

minor

oo

post

slur

transphobes

tw

unreality

warning

Counting the blog name, they've also said "i" and "say".

In terms of variations on "ok", the blog has used:

Punctuation marks (question marks, exclamation points, ellipsis, variations and combinations thereof, etc) [secondary source containing post content instead of tags]

Differing capitalization

Repetition

Emoticon

Emoji

Ascii art, font colors, typographical symbols

Strikethrough

Differing text formatting

There isn't typically much to verify with gimmick blogs that are just doing a consistent bit compared to gimmick blogs claiming to present facts (thus the lack of verification status), especially considering how such aforementioned blogs work solely off of semantics and their own loosely defined (if any) rules. Despite this, I had fun navigating this blog in order to determine what the unspoken rules of "i-say-ok" are. For instance, "Okay" is not allowed. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

do you have autism btw

💥👍

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

Among us sex gif

Presumably you're talking about the blog @amongussexgif.

The blog's owner certainly doesn't post the gif as often as the name would suggest, but xe still posts it in general, so, not really anything to verify. Probably doesn't even count as a gimmick blog, since it's seemingly used more as a main.

Just for the heck of it, I did try and source the aforementioned gif.

Searching for it on all the major image search engines brought up this Reddit post from 2 years ago as the earliest indexed result, however the phrasing of the title makes it obvious that the OP wasn't the original creator.

It's most likely the gif originates from some social media user, my gut says Twitter user, and is an edit or recreation of a remarkably similar "Ugandan Knuckles" gif - same style, quality, the two characters are even the same color in the same, uh, order. I'm not gonna try and source that meme, though. I have my limits.

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

did u make this account just to reblog the cleaning product identifier

Nope, I'm drafting other posts for various gimmick blogs. Speaking of, anyone can feel free to suggest some.

[superbellsubways]

oh god are sex bots coming back i just got one.. GET AWAY‼️

[identifying-cleaning-products]

Annie Ozen Shell Spray Bottle

[verifying-gimmick-posts]

Gimmick Post Verification Status: DUBIOUS

The image in this post is a stock photo uploaded to various hosting sites by Africa Studio, a large stock photography studio.

A google search for "Blue Shell Spray Bottle" brings up several results, and it is inconclusive if the Annie Ozen Shell Spray Bottle that the gimmick blog linked is the one depicted. "BROXAN Seashell Spray Bottle 10.14oz" (Available at the link on BLUEOCO's website, BLUEOCO being the parent company of BROXAN) is close, however this bottle is much shorter and wider than the one in the stock photo. The Boring Brand (not to be confused with the Elon Musk-founded "The Boring Company") also offers a similar product, that being "Shell-Shaped Water Bottles." These bottles, in their product photo, may seem to feature a much more closely matching nozzle, however each bottle has a nearly identical nozzle, differing only in coloration.

Regardless, it's possible that the photographer who staged the photo swapped the nozzles.

This image may make it appear that the Annie Ozen bottle is far wider than the one in the photograph, however the slightly differing angles make it hard to tell for sure, and even then it's possible that not all bottles are manufactured to the exact same dimensions. The Boring Brand's bottle also isn't safe from scrutiny, as the bottle itself seems shorter, the shell design's pattern seems more concave, and the material appears as a lighter shade of blue - though these, too, could be a quirk in manufacturing. The coloration specifically could be different for multiple reasons, be that general manufacturing, the lighting of either photos, the different backgrounds, etc.

Unfortunately, I was unsuccessful in finding official information regarding this photo's origins. While I was able to source it to Africa Studio, the name of the photographer was not listed on any stock image distribution sites nor the studio's official website. I originally thought to contact the studio regarding the bottle, however after creating a LinkedIn account and finding the contact email for the oddly Ukrainian-based Africa Studio, I realized that that would have been fucking insane of me.

The only other noteworthy thing regarding this photo is that the specific distribution channel's watermark, 123RF, really threw me for a loop for a moment. 123RF, while a genuine and functional stock photo distribution platform, is a really poorly managed website. users on r/stockphotography reported extremely slow verification times, odd delays in payouts and photos being flagged as containing irrelevant captions at random. In addition, this website was recently in the news for a comically devastating data breach affecting 8.3 million users, with leaked information including:

Full names.

User names.

IP addresses.

Phone numbers.

Email addresses.

Password hashes.

Facebook profile links.

Addresses including postcodes.

Date of account registration on 123RF.

Location including Country, States, and cities.

That isn't relevant at all, but like, damn.