Speaker summary
⁠82%1 analyzed article/video84 analyzed words
BS Summary: These John Moot results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Burden of Proof, Hasty Generalization, and Ad Hominem, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 33.3% saturation with 48 hits. Analysis detected 168 faulty-reasoning hits from 84 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 40% and a BS Rank of ⁠59% (11,863 of 28,364 speakers). This John Moot is worse (more manipulative) than 58.20% of the peer group.
John Moot
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 84
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

58% percentile
025507510058.2% percentile
40.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos84 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 33.3%33.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 33.3%33.3%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 16.7%16.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 16.7%16.7%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 15.9%Burden of Proof: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 0.4%Negativity Bias: Speaker 16.7%, sitewide 19.2%Ad Hominem: Speaker 16.7%, sitewide 2.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos