Yes, you've misinterpreted my last post.
The programs I've linked to are well respected and used extensively in academia. Sure you have to download them, but those of us who use Linux, Firefox etc... do that on a regular basis. They're big projects with lots of references from other sites to authenticate them. The snippet of code I wrote myself is harmless, and anybody capable of running it can verify that for themselves.
Are you seriously suggesting that a small group of posters have colluded to destroy the credibility of the subject-matter of this thread?
No, the program wouldn't identify posters who were colluding with each other. What it would identify would be individual persons posting under several different usernames.
Alvin has alleged that there may be foul play in the thread, though he hasn't been specific about who he suspects. The problem with the analysis is that it's a very powerful way of testing suspicions, but not something that you can do as a 'fishing' expedition - because of a statistical issue known as the 'prosecutor's fallacy'. This is why I haven't just posted the results of the analysis here - unless you're clear about what you're looking for, you can't interpret them.
I had my own suspicions, which have been corroborated. I wonder what Alvins are - I suspect they're different from mine, but I'm still curious.