Well DIR, maybe I am different.
I like all the information so I can assess things. Retrace steps like a forensic detective. Not just have someone provide me evidence. So knowing about a company, performance (stock and business operations) other insight (industry, competitive intelligence, CSFs, SWOT analysis etc. I like all of the evidence (so I can assess the quality and reliablity of my witnesses on the stand - or posting here).. and if I catch some perjury, then, I can dismiss that witness. Hey, I don't need someone faking not being able to put a bloody glove on over a rubber glove. As a prosecutor, I would have challenged them. ie. make an exact plaster cast based on the dimensions of the hand and prove to the jury that the glove did fit. (i.e no acquittal). take your head out and think. I answered you as you seem to imply that I had nothing better to do. It is called due dilligence. If I ever get back in, it would be because I have fully assessed the current risks, players and position.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
