As with most things, so in charting, as the typical indicators are inexact, not perfect, and reflect only what the math behind them allows them to reflect... leaving it to you to know what that is, and what it means in context, while adjusting your comprehension the known knowns and the known unknowns. Just as I noted, yesterday, in regard to the utility of the updated table re the component mineral values at Nemegosenda: that there is utility in the data being presented doesn't in any way relieve you of the obligation to know how and why it is useful, while accepting that data in the context of the need for adjusting your comprehension of it for the knowns it contains, and for the knowns it does not...
So to, in charting. The issue of extracting larger utility from the information there is... requires understanding what of, and how, real events that occur are going to be reflected in the charts... and it requires making proper comparisons between different indicators to extract information from the comparisons of indicators that the indicators themselves without comparison don't contain in graphic form...
A first question for you... given they are sort of the opposite of normal buying and selling, how will short sales tend to look on a chart ? How will shorts tend to influence the charted indicators differently than other buying and selling, and how do shorts alter the look of charted indicators relative to what they'd look like without them ?
If you don't have any answers to that... you probably can't use the fact of the differences that will exist in the indicators to make comparisons between them that will tend to reveal the information you want ?
Then, if the indicators don't show it directly, what comparisons between indicators will tend to reveal that activity. What is the variation in impact on charts between a short entered, and a short closed ? If you don't have any tools to use in making comparisons between indicators that would tend to reveal short sales on both sides of that trade... then, I guess, you'd never see any evidence of them, either way, in a chart ?
If you say you see no evidence... does that mean the evidence doesn't exist... or does that mean only that you don't see it, either because you aren't looking, or aren't looking at the right indicators, aren't looking at the indicators properly, or aren't looking at the right comparisons made between them, that would tend to do a better job of showing you what you say you don't see ?
At SRSR, there is an obvious recent known... with one day in which the vast majority of the trade was shares sold short. So, do you see anything anomalous or different in your charts that would tend to reveal that fact to you ? Anything odd or peculiar in the charts, or in comparisons made between features or between indicators on them, that looks different than it would normally appear... if the transactions the chart showed for that period weren't known short sales ?
There ARE chart traces, or comparisons that can be made between indicators on the charts, that will tend to reveal the fact of variations in the charts imposed by the trading activity of shorts...
I'll leave it to you to explain what the variations are and why they exist...
Still, the SRSR daily chart clearly shows distribution of around 5 million shares last week. The SRSR weekly chart clearly shows accumulation of around 5 million shares for the same time period, last week. Why are they different, what does the difference mean, in context, and which one is "right" ?
What impact SHOULD you expect that 5 million shares sold short will have on the chart?
Charts aren't magical predictors of future events... although they can tend to function as rough, ignorant predictors when they are seen as likely aggregating real indications of investor expectations and behavior... That works, but only when the behavior is "honest" in its reflection of events based on investors expectations, and when it is not a product of investors intent in posturing for the purpose of altering the appearance of the charts.
The trade in (and the conversation about) SRSR is pretty clearly dominated by a number of quite purposeful actors... which doesn't mean the charts are made meaningless because a contest exists... but it does create a responsibility on the part of the users of charts to adjust interpretation of them for the known in the facts of the effort made in control or manipulation of the trade, and the charts. People often lie to advance their interest... and that fact means charts can lie, and are likely to be used to tell lies, to the degree people who do understand how to influence them, know how to use them to foster lies...
Of course, that means the chart is made much less useful or functional as a "neutral" predictor enabling an unbiased analysis or interpretation of market actors choices... and it is made much less a reflection of investors honest opinions re the value of the stock, than it is a reflection of the exercise of market power intended to manipulate that perception, and thus the price...
In current context, a few questions result: What does one vote made with 5 million shares behind it... mean about the current or future value of SRSR stock ? What does that same vote mean, not about perception of value, but about apparent purpose in altering the price ? What does it mean... that is more about the nature of the effort applied in manipulating market perceptions... than it is about anything else ?
The shorts effort last week was obvious... quite clearly it was purposeful, intended to cap an incremental move higher that, because of how people do tend to interpret charts, would be likely to lead to a much stronger move higher... which you have posted about and predicted, as much as anyone here.
It is obvious that move WOULD have taken place, last week, and it would have tripped chart indicators used as predictors or triggers of a move higher, without the effort that WAS made by the shorts... intended to alter the chart...
So, does that vote that was made with 5 million shares sold short last week... really change any fact re the value of a share... ???? Of course, it does NOT... it merely records an expression of an opinion that they paid (a lot) to have expressed... that isn't an honest opinion about the value a share has... rather than an honest opinion about their preferences revealed in terms of manipulation of the trade...
LOL!!! They are subsidizing the sale of cheap shares for you now... at a time when they are getting much, much closer to becoming quite a lot pricier... which seems to me to be a pretty good deal that I'd not want to pass on... so...
Thanks, guys...
Should note, too, that there is a clear consistency in the pattern. Shorting shares after news is released... is clearly intended as a manipulation, intending to alter the market perception of the value inherent in the news... "Look, the news must not be good, because share prices moved lower after the news". That pattern is a constant, here...
When you KNOW people are lying to you, that way... ???
I think, on balance, given the obviousness, the current effort will and has already proven it to be a failure. As more people become aware of the fact of the nature of the effort being made to manipulate perceptions... manipulating the price, and the charts... to lie about the value with manipulation of the price... the less effective the effort in telling those lies will be... as the fact of the effort is made more apparent.
Of course, that effort SHOULD have been transparent... and fully apparent... all along.
Others opinions, particularly when expressed that way, don't alter my perception of the value of a SRSR share in any case... and I'm confident enough in my own effort in DD and valuation to think the shorts are quite grossly wrong... wrong about the value of the stock, wrong about the trade, wrong in their purpose, and wrong in the method applied in advancing their purpose... while also thinking that they don't really matter in context of my own purpose and interest...
I think it is fact the shorts here intend to manipulate prices lower, with effort talking it lower, first, and, with failure in that effort, with market power applied to force the result. They appear to be thinking that the price in the immediate result is all that matters, even when the value that exists CLEARLY doesn't justify the result imposed or the effort applied in the manipulating the price...
I clearly stand to benefit from their effort in manipulating prices lower... to the degree it continues to enable me in buying cheap shares, well below true value... which effort becomes more valuable to me, the closer we come to "recognition events" occurring, that will result from accomplishments that are announced, when they are...
I also understand they will need to cover... so every share sold short now means a future buy of a share is already lined up...
The impact they have in the short term is that they intend, as revealed in the pattern of their trade. The effort made has clearly dinked the share price, for now... as they succeeded in averting a move higher last week, as that WAS occurring. That awareness of the structure of the trade is useful, as a clear benefit is enabled for those accumulating, who can still accumulate shares at lower prices. In the longer term, it is a clearly a losing trade... for the shorts.
For now, the intent appears to be to lower the share price, now, hoping to manipulate the price down more, later, to enable covering at lower prices, to make a profit. The facts don't justify the effort being made to reduce the price through manipulation... so they clearly intend to win only by the exercise of effort, and market power, applied to manipulating the market... which also has the impact of making accumulation of cheap shares bought below true value that much easier, with those cheap shares bought below value, largely at their expense.
The fact they are present, doing what they are, will also ensure future demand, and will work to raise prices later, given the fact of a large fixed demand for shares that will need to be bought to cover at higher prices... which is a given if prices move higher.
THAT, to me, is the relevance of the obviousness in the trade last week... Accumulation continues, and share prices have been and are going to be moving higher as events unfold... and, as a result, the shorts have been forced into getting more and more obvious... even back to being ham-fisted... in their effort to manipulate the trade and defend their position...
Time and right are on longs side...
Thank the shorts for playing, and take full advantage of their effort to make it easier for you to load up on shares that are being sold well below their real value... then wait for the value to be recognized...
Given where we are now, relative to prior and future "events" and the market's valuation of them, the wait shouldn't be that long, and the reward for having the required, not large, degree of patience from here... should be significant.
JMHO
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
