There's nothing objective or credible about how whytee...

There's nothing objective or credible about how whytee posts.

I've previously analyzed (linked)how he/she portrays a certain narrative by omitting information, slow drips other information to milk the discourse and plays ignorant to anything positive.

During one of the 4c announcements whytee tried to make $40 million disappear by pretending pro forma cash from a credit raise was the debt draw-down being counted twice.

Here where whytee says: "But I do believe that they are usually withheld because if investors know what's in them it would have a negative effect on the share price, not because of sensitive commercial or proprietary information." Whether it is actually what whytee believes or not it is what is going to be said. Note the effort to also discredit alternate answers "... not because of sensitive commercial or proprietary. " No reason, or explanation, as to why he/she believes one point over the other. Just that it fits a certain narrative.

Credibility is also why the two most negative posters here claim to be doctors. They know their behaviors and comments are too loaded that they have made some wild claims in the past.

Soemone could probably used these guys as qualitative examples continuing on from other works regarding the psychology of trading. They've got years of data to work with.