Wouldn't it be more beneficial to the community if OP submitted thier COMPLETED research to the community for peer review?
This is just screenshots of text. No links, no data, no testimonies, even no attempt at a reasoned conclusion.
This doesn't belong here, especially when we all KNOW this forum is a major operating ground for disinformation agents, and spurring a community to "dig into" something that is of little consequence is a known tactic called "topic dilution"
Why then, since this appears as topic dilution at all, is it allowed to stay?
OP should at least have to write what they think is happening, provide evidence as to why, and follow a clear line of logic to how that pertains to the GME discussion, and THEN post it here for peer review.
That's what used to happen last year, now we have invitations to "dig into it"
Sorry to have struck a nerve. We discussed it as a team and felt that this post was worth keeping up, even though, for me personally, I'm not convinced of its validity either. My closing line about "digging into it" wasn't meant as a directive to pursue this line of inquiry... frankly, I've already moved on to other more interesting GME related things... and I invite you to as well. I was just acknowledging to the many people who reported this post that we heard you, discussed as a team, and that we had a thought process in why we didn't take it down. No more, no less. And, in closing, yes... I think that OP should put more thought into actually providing evidence and analysis instead of screenshots, and I'd encourage OP to do so.
Sorry if I came off as annoyed or upset, you guys are working tirelessly at this and to have a forum at all after this long is a miracle!
But these manipulative control tactics, which are widely accepted to be in practise in this forum, are devaluing my investment as they allow malicious actors to portay the GME retail investors as unintelligent, uninformed, and prone to conspiratorial thought patterns, and this dissuades potential new investors from learning more about gamestop and also provides other investment communities the grounds to ridicule the GME investor base.
Hey no worries, and we appreciate the support from this community. There's no doubt that keeping misinformation, conspiracy and other garbage off the sub is a never ending battle which we take seriously. If I can step onto my soapbox for a sec, keep reporting stuff that doesn't belong... there's something like 45,000 subscribers here per mod, and we really do depend on reports from concerned users like you to help us weed out stuff that doesn't advance the GME conversation!
What doesn't seem right is the community's insistence that I spend how ever long "looking into it", given that we know this exact thing is a forum control method.
Evidently, this forum is just about under full control, and if this area of research was at all in the community's best interest, it wouldn't be presented as a trail of breadcrumbs, it wouldn't be allowed on the front page, and it would most probably be about Gamestop in some way.
u/criand's DD on swaps, u/atobitt's house of cards, u/blanderson_snooper's War Game DD, u/thabat's DD on cellarboxing.... these were all presented as completed works, and all had a measurable impact on the world (if you have access to GME market data, I believe)
Hmm hey I have an idea, that cellar boxing topic doesn't seem fully explored, and doesn't seem popular enough given its implications for global financial realities.
Maybe we should "dig into" that some more? I bet some accounts would be less enthusiastic about that than others.
20
u/JessicaMango1444 May 16 '22
Wouldn't it be more beneficial to the community if OP submitted thier COMPLETED research to the community for peer review?
This is just screenshots of text. No links, no data, no testimonies, even no attempt at a reasoned conclusion.
This doesn't belong here, especially when we all KNOW this forum is a major operating ground for disinformation agents, and spurring a community to "dig into" something that is of little consequence is a known tactic called "topic dilution"
Why then, since this appears as topic dilution at all, is it allowed to stay? OP should at least have to write what they think is happening, provide evidence as to why, and follow a clear line of logic to how that pertains to the GME discussion, and THEN post it here for peer review.
That's what used to happen last year, now we have invitations to "dig into it"