I'm not positing anything other than "the kneejerk dismissal based only one size is not a good argument". I'm arguing that they *can* have an argument, and that you're supposed to NOT assume that it's small enough to discount.  Give me a reason to believe those accounts had a negligible influence that's a little more rigorous than "there's too few accounts". Kind of reminds me of how Randi Harper's blockbot just blocked all people that followed two or more [bad people], where [bad people] was a list of like 7 GG figureheads.   The reverse of this argument is something like "Joe Rogan, Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Sargon of Akkad, and Sam Harris??? That's only like 5 guys making videos in their basements! How could they possibly influence anyone???"   TL;DR: an argument about influenced based only on size is flawed.