Statistics show Negative poster's to be correct. So What now?, page-2

BJB an interesting post and very informative. As you know I like to keep my analysis in the real world of technical analysis and I don't pay all that much attention to speculative fundamental analysis let alone real fundamental analysis that is based on actual earnings and earnings forecasts.
In TA when I find a chart that looks promising the first thing I do is look for reasons not to take a trade. My interest in HC relates to a failing of mine which is the need to know something about a stock that I intend to trade. This is a weakness in my current system. But one thing that I have found very useful is to apply the same strategy that I use in TA to my review of HC sFA posts. I look for criticism and valid reasons for not taking a long position in any low cap spec stock. In the past these reasons fall into the categories of Company Management, the Company's BOD, and the Company's financials and capital structure. Sometimes you can get quite good info on all of this but other times you have to delve deeper yourself and do your own research. This has saved me a lot of money in the past.
The reason the up-talking posts get lots of likes is because they are all what I call "feel good" posts. When a Holder reads these posts they get a dopamine hit which gives them a good feeling. I have often thought that a good indicator of speculative over exuberance in a stock would be to count the number of these "feel good" likes a stock is receiving. I wouldn't be surprised if the Qants that have access to HC data aren't already doing this with their machine learning algorithms.
Just my thoughts and all IMO of course.