Quote from: nattybear on July 02, 2019, 10:17:10 PM

Quote from: over45 on July 02, 2019, 10:06:48 PM

I think I see where the problem is - you are making assumptions using the wrong data to attempt to make your point. He is likely talking about other elected reversals much further back in a time series of the pricing move - not the most recent move. If you look at many of his past charts these elected reversals can be many months or even years apart.

I can't spend the time rummaging through all the data or blog posts - but I'd bet that's the case.

*slow clap*

Excellent rebuttal... I've just bolded a couple of statements in your comment that highlights the same ambiguous writing that comes from MA... Another unveiled... I'd love to see the troll bill that MA pays out - that's really become one of the most reliable explanations for the constant rotation of new users here with zero evidence to contradict the observations made across the board.

If you want to attempt a legitimate debate here is how it works. You counter an argument with research and evidence which DEMONSTRATES your point. In this scenario, we have an "it's likely", and an "I'd bet". However, let us not forget the same non-descriptive illusionary reversals that occurred at some point in the past which we have evidence of... Oh wait... No we don't...

I don't have to do anything to satisfy you. I'm happy with what Socrates provides and have had no problems. Like a previous poster said - I won't take anyone's word for anything and suspect their data selection is incorrect leading to a flawed analysis.

Slow clap for your attempt. Learn to read the fine print.