# Ranking Anomalies Trigger Investigation, Not Attribution A ranking anomaly justifies investigation without proving who caused it. ## Scope & conditions - This applies when independent measurements conflict, rankings move in synchronized patterns, or a control case behaves differently from the subject. - Those signals can rule out simple explanations and justify an integrity review. They do not, by themselves, identify the actor, mechanism, or intent behind the pattern. - Attribution needs evidence that connects a specific actor to the manipulation, not only a plausible mechanism or a beneficiary. ## Source anchor > "My best guess, consistent with all the data:" <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> ## Links - [[3. Resources/Permanent Notes/Active Installs Reward Existing Winners]] — extends: when active installs drive visibility, suspect install data can distort the advantage the ranking system compounds. - [[3. Resources/Permanent Notes/A System Failure That Looks Like a Performance Failure Never Gets Fixed]] — contrasts: both cases require separating observed behavior from an unproven causal story. - [[Open Source Governance MOC]] — belongs-in: a public directory needs an auditable process for investigating data-integrity signals without overstating attribution. ## Source - [[3. Resources/Readwise/Articles/Something Is Wrong With the WordPress.org Popular Themes List A Two-Year Investigation]] — documents a two-year anomaly pattern, control comparisons, and a proposed mechanism while labeling the mechanism as a best guess.