InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 41
Posts 20096
Boards Moderated 2
Alias Born 01/04/2011

Re: Choi post# 10528

Friday, 08/26/2022 4:05:03 PM

Friday, August 26, 2022 4:05:03 PM

Post# of 17831
'Cherry-picked' was issues of the response provided 'advising' to not cherry pick. The irony.

"Delving deeply" is done with this type of too-coincidentally-relevant information that shows same narratives, same location, same industry, with differing companies, and with some same players, previous same/same of which is/was 'known' was a scam.

Better is to address what was cited, rather than to change the issues discussed, and then supporting new claims as negations to the facts stated.

That old post is coherent. Claim it isn't is false. Claim it isn't coherent distracts and diverts from the factual comparison made that suggests potential issue of concern.

It is not speculation to cite similarities, to cite same language, to cite same narratives, to cite some same players.

You calimed "Nils Ollquist was never charged." Yet this was not ever even suggested or claimed in the post responded to that raised issue about narrative and company and mngt similarities.

A post has no need to even distract and to divert a narrative, to even raise a concern about facts never claimed... and then, as means to discredit those facts raised.

Cherry picking is negating facts. Cherry picking is claiming these cited facts do not matter at all. Yet notating and considering these similarities along with all other information is not cherry picking at all, as claimed.

The claim of cherry picking implies one should disregard the information. That itself is cherry picking!

.

(c) copyright 2022