YES THIS 🎯

This is what I mean when I talk about “interpretation.” You gather follows, zaps, likes, number of responses to someone’s posts, whatever data you think is relevant. You interpret it meaning you translate each category of data into a “rating” in a common format selected by you bc you find it useful. I propose the rating format needs, at the least, a score. Even better to have a confidence and a context. I decide I’ll “interpret” a follow as a score of 1 (probably not a bot) and a mute as a score of 0 (probably a bot). A zap I also interpret as a score of 1. But maybe you don’t trust zaps bc they’re not verifiable (unless it’s ecash) so you don’t use zaps in your calculations. In any case, you now have a ton of “ratings” that you can use to calculate a WEIGHTED AVERAGE which feeds into the GrapeRank score which will ultimately be more useful than follow counts or PageRank in the same sense that hammers are more useful than feathers at banging nails into wood. (Well, I guess that’s just my opinion … utility is subjective and arbitrary … who’s to say?)

More useful bc you can use the above score as the weights to calculate the next round of scores, like: which relays, mints, etc are the most trustworthy? Actual pain points.