It's just hard to swallow when I already know what the systematic reviews with meta analysis say. If what you were saying was reliable, I would adjust and polish my posts to make sure it conforms to the "standard", however when the standard is garbage or there is no agreed upon standard, I don't have regard for it. As long as I can back up what I say with evidence, (and I do) that is good enough for me. If there was a clear golden standard and criteria that could be applied which were deemed reliable, then I would use that, but there isn't.
May Chart, page-5766
Add MAY (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
3.1¢ |
Change
-0.001(3.13%) |
Mkt cap ! $104.4M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| 3.1¢ | 3.1¢ | 3.0¢ | $29.78K | 986.3K |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | 1151258 | 3.0¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| 3.1¢ | 367393 | 3 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 15/11/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| MAY (ASX) Chart |