patrick.net

Their count of "Pinocchios" seems unserious and subjective. I tended to give a lower number for both major parties, which might seem ironic but I would not accuse anyone of lying where they might have had some reasonable basis to believe what they said. The exception shows what I mean: I gave the maximum 4 "Pinocchios" to Mitt Romney's statement, “The size of our Navy is at levels not seen since 1916." That statement is patently absurd, but WaPo gave it only three "Pinocchios." In other examples, I gave fewer than Wapo's count, or once exactly the same. Without an objective basis to score numerically, the "Pinocchio" count seems like a silly gimmick to get clicks; I would not have bothered if it hadn't been recommended by Dan, and even so I stopped after fewer than 10.

LogOcurious2 says

Their count of "Pinocchios" seems unserious and subjective. I tended to give a lower number for both major parties, which might seem ironic but I would not accuse anyone of lying where they might have had some reasonable basis to believe what they said. The exception shows what I mean: I gave the maximum 4 "Pinocchios" to Mitt Romney's statement, “The size of our Navy is at levels not seen since 1916." That statement is patently absurd, but WaPo gave it only three "Pinocchios." In other examples, I gave fewer than Wapo's count, or once exactly the same. Without an objective basis to score numerically, the "Pinocchio" count seems like a silly gimmick to get clicks; I would not have bothered if it hadn't been recommended by Dan, and even so I stopped after fewer than 10.

I agree, this game is pretty lame.