A curious evaluation by Grok about the level of rigor of Counting Stars

As you know, one of the guidelines I set myself every day when publishing articles on this blog is the need for them to be written with rigor.

What Grok's artificial intelligence says about Counting Stars and its incorrect data
How Counting Stars is made and who decides what should be covered in this blog

I don't like sensationalist journalism or journalism that bases its information on rumors or, worse yet, false information. That's why at Counting Stars I try to do something different, even if I don't always succeed. Recently, I decided to run a test by submitting this blog to an evaluation by Grok, Twitter's artificial intelligence, asking the following question: "How would you rate the level of rigor of the outono.net blog?"

I didn't know what the result of this evaluation would be, and I was a bit surprised. Grok's response can be read here. I've copied the full response here, translated into English (highlighting some things in bold), and I've added some observations below:

To assess the level of rigor of the outono.net blog, I would consider several aspects based on the information available about its approach and operation. This blog, known as "Counting Stars" or "Contando Estrelas," is managed by a single author, Elentir, who describes it as a personal space financed exclusively with his own resources. This grants it editorial independence, as it does not accept orders from external individuals or organizations. Furthermore, it presents itself as a project guided by principles of freedom, rigor, and service to the truth, with a commitment to offering direct access to sources of information whenever possible.

The blog's content has a clear editorial line: Catholic, democratic, and conservative-liberal, with a firm stance against totalitarianism. This suggests that the topics covered—such as the defense of the right to life, liberty, and human dignity—are framed within a defined ideological perspective, which could influence the selection and presentation of information. However, the mention of detailed technical analysis, as in the case of an article on the Supermarine Spitfire, indicates an effort to support claims with precision and concrete data, which points to a level of rigor in the research.

That said, as this is a personal blog rather than a traditional academic or journalistic source, rigor can vary depending on the topic and purpose of the article. The lack of an editorial team or formal peer-review process could limit objectivity compared to more structured outlets. Furthermore, the emphasis on connecting directly with sources is positive, but it would depend on the quality and veracity of those sources, as well as how they are interpreted.

In summary, I would rate outono.net's level of rigor as notable for a personal blog, especially on topics where the author demonstrates detailed and substantiated analysis. However, its strong ideological focus and lack of a formal editorial structure suggest that the rigor may not be uniform or meet the standards of academic or scientific publications. It would be at an intermediate-high level for an opinion blog, but not at the same level as sources with more systematic methodologies.

I enjoyed the analysis, including the criticisms, which I take for granted. In fact, whenever someone criticizes me for not being objective about my blog, I always say the same thing: I try to keep my blog independent and rigorous, but I am not objective or impartial. As Grok's analysis clearly points out, this blog has a very defined editorial line and is a space for opinion, which implies taking a stand for very clear principles and approaching them in a personal way.

In fact, I write in the first person because I reflect my opinion. One thing I don't like about some media outlets is that they portray opinions in news stories as if they were objective facts, when they aren't. Obviously, here I defend principles and ideas that many may disagree with, but I don't intend to pass them off as a single-minded way of thinking that no one can disagree with.

I'm glad to see that an artificial intelligence rates Contando Estrelas as having an intermediate-high level of rigor for an opinion blog, because I think it indicates that, after all, my efforts aren't in vain. The fact that it doesn't consider this blog at the level of academic or scientific publications isn't something that keeps me up at night, though, because I've never intended to do work of that level, since the time I usually dedicate to writing an article doesn't allow it either. In any case, I'm not satisfied and I will continue doing my best to improve.