Oh it was a double top, there was no doubt about it. You simply...

Oh it was a double top, there was no doubt about it. You simply need to use the monthly time frame.

It is nice to see the ASX:MAY forum's have been a good training ground on technical analysis for you. You constantly criticise others for their analysis then get proven 100% wrong on almost every criticism you make. To criticise ectoplasm is laughable, he has been a mainstay in the technical analysis field on multiple forums/platforms for decades.

For the record:
1) You said: "Why are a some now referring to a double top at .105 when the SP tagged .105 8 times in 25 days?" (66717208) which leads me to believe you completely forgot to analyse the stock with the monthly time frame. On the monthly it was a double top, there is no doubt about it.
2) The trading view algorithm automatically identified a cup and handle pattern, you said: "the old invalid Cup & Handle gets bought up again" (66714145), yet the trading software automatically identifies it as a cup and handle... (I'm not sure how much more evidence you would need to be convinced you were wrong about the cup and handle being "invalid" at this point...).
3) In regards to the golden cross being alerted here: 65280415, you said: "Calling an alert for a “golden cross” at this time is simple ridiculous and misleading" (65283414) and other garbage along the same lines. I have asked you many many times, when would have been a better time to alert the Golden cross. The truth is, it was alerted at the perfect time, 47work days before it occured (before it was blatantly obvious, because at the time I alerted it the SMA's were diverging [going further apart] and to someone like you who probably didn't understand the mechanics of it, you probably didn't realise that as time went on, the 200sma would take less data from the peaks into consideration and would therefore lead to the 200sma being reduced [leading to a convergence of the 50sma and 200sma =golden cross]).

Golden cross prediction alerted 47business days before it happened.


The double top:


Cup and handle identified automatically by algorithm/script:


So looking at all these past arguments, it appears the problem is actually slick's neglect for the monthly time scale. It appears if he cannot see it on the daily or weekly he simply takes issue with everyone else's analysis and declares it "misleading" if it doesn't fit his smaller time frames... The problem for slick is that some patterns do occur on the monthly time frame, and not only that, but as we know from a mountain of academic research, the monthly time frame is actually more reliable than the daily/weekly [because it takes into account more data] (which is ironic, because he was accusing others of being misleading here: (65283414), yet when you really look at the facts of the matters, it appears he is trying to shift the narrative of the analysis to the daily/weekly to possibly hide the real patterns?) Disappointing to say the least.