So there are uploads that when you check the source aren't the actual full size (i.e. instead of suffixing :orig uploads are left either :large or non-suffixed), it seems. Only about 50 are tagged under twitter sample, but I very much suspect there are more.
What's our stance on this? Should we treat these the same way we do pixiv samples? Because I was thinking of flagging post #2004618 as I was sweeping through yaman's uploads on Twitter earlier today, since it was a lower res upload of the full I uploaded (post #2573012). It appears to me really unnecessary to have.
And perhaps another question I could add to this is if there is a way to automate this, like how RaisingK does md5 mismatches on pixiv? Though I guess the problem is that pages aren't enumerated as they are on pixiv, so if you want to check an md5 against a "group" of images on Twitter you would have to check it against all of them and look for one match, which could be more arduous than I imagine. Plus it begs the question of if scraping through Twitter like that is possible or there's some sort of limitation...