These all look fake to me

They are not fake in the sense of fake people -- Gleb runs meatpuppets, err... paid virtual assistants. These are real people, it's just that they are employed by InIn and their job is social media promotion which means they are paid to retweet, like, upvote. See e.g. this comment and the follow-up.

This also points to paid likes, since poor-country likes are cheaper than rich-country ones, and being popular only in third world countries doesn't seem likely from your writing.

Why don't you think there are reasons that Intentional Insights might be more popular in poor-countries? Do you think you have a good idea what kind of content an Bangladeshi atheist wants to read?

Thanks for explaining your claims, and the evidence that led to it.

Let's take Sargin indeed as an example. He's someone who has read Intentional Insights content for a while, and has been getting into rationality and effective altruism as a result. He offered to volunteer for the organization, and has proved a good volunteer. We then brought him on as a part-time contractor. We have several people like him, who volunteer 2/3rds of their time, and work for 1/3 of their time.

InIn social media and our website are targeted to all people around the world. Our website gets about 12K hits per month, with the following countries being the top 5 in the last month: US, India, Phillipines, Malaysia, Indonesia. Our FB page is "liked" mostly by people in developing countries as well.

Why is this? Partially because of how our advertising works. We follow the "drowning child" model of advertising - we don't place higher value on people in rich countries than in poorer countries when we promote content, as we believe our content can help people around the world. So when we boost a post on FB, we boost it in the most cost-effective means possible, which means it gets delivered mostly to the countries where the clicks are cheapest, namely India, Phillipines, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc. They then have the option of clicking "like" on the post and "liking" the FB page, if they wish.

While we boost posts on FB, we don't boost posts on Twitter or Pinterest, as we don't have the skills within the organization to do so. So you can see the difference in our followers on Twitter, of whom we have around 11K or so - most are not from developing countries, and the same is true of our 4.5K followers on Pinterest.

This is highly different from buying likes, namely specifically paying people to like the page or posts. Doing so doesn't build community or engagement, which is the point of social media, and would not align with the Intentional Insights mission of spreading rational thinking and effective altruism broadly. Since that's the goal of InIn, it really doesn't make sense for us to do so.

We only do what advances our mission, even if some folks here might disagree with our methods or goals - orienting toward asking what advances our mission and working backward from that might help you model us better :-)

P. S. For anyone wanting to help us update, the best way to convince us to do so is to show how what we're doing is not advancing the mission of promoting rational thinking and effective altruist ideas broadly.

We pay several people to do social media management of InIn's accounts :-) This is highly different from buying likes themselves. See my response to jkaufman here.