We've been over this quite a few times.
I just don't like seeing folk being peddled bullshit.
I'll give you some more background, though, because I'm in a great mood.
So I'm into philosophy, which means I'm into arguing over points, on the basis of available evidence.
A week or so before I first contributed to this sub forum, a friend approached me for a valuation of AUZ, stating that they'd bought in on the basis of HC furore.
I did some cursory analysis and advised he sold at a profit at about 10c, about where I valued the stock. He made some 5x on the pump.
Then about a week later, another friend came to me asking for the same advise. At this point I was familiar with the stock and well aware of the buzz so I decided to ask around with some geologists I went to uni with, whether they had done their due diligence on this anomaly.
Their assessments were more critical than mine.
So I told my friend to get the f out asap and he made some ~7x
These were both clever guys academically, but they don't do their research, they trade on sentiment, and they haven't really made any money on the markets despite all their efforts.
They might have even lost, they are open enough with me to admit they only talk about their "wins".
Anyhow, at this post, given I've already been browsing HC for what feels like years, I decided to check in on this particular sub forum to see just how bad it was.
And it presented the worst example of the sort of radical cognitive bias these kinds of online communities generate, that I have ever seen on this website.
Utterly contemptible, and dangerous.
So at this point, I decided to mention a few things, and the rest, as they say, is history.
Couple final points I'd mention:
1. No-one has been able to muster anything approximating a counter to my rationale here.
Indeed most of the responses I have received as merely desperate dismissal and petty insult, with only a very few being misleading, besides the point, or already well considered factoids.
2. When asked for advice, many times now the collective response from this thread has been an aggressive hurling of "DYOR" and implications of freeloading.
Now to me, that indicates none of the holding contributors here are capable of providing coherent opinion, because not a one of you is basing your decisions on fact. Rather, you base them on pure emotion.
Now this is all behaviour I encounter in political and otherwise philosophical commentary all the time, always made by the most demonstrably ignorant.
Something to think about.
I'm here (this really isn't a significant effort, we are online and commentary takes mere moments) because I want to promote critical thinking, and the proper evaluation of sources where ever I am.
Glta, hope you like my little story.
Expand
(20min delay)