/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>30447554
>no true scotsman
Fuck off.

>>30383227
>State facts
>Retorts back with "oh no the hubris of man"
Lol ok Shakespeare. Got any information not dripping in Tu Quoque or Ad Hominem? All of ours is in the OP. All you have is the shit you use to brush your fetid teeth.

>>30371361
>>30371361
>Kaijibro calmly explaining DD to shills
To be fair, had they at any fucking point gave non fallacy ridden, actual arguments to my points, i would not be so jaded and paranoid about FUD now. It really is fucking crazy how little effort they put in to lie to us. I can think of 3 or so ways to demoralize the whole lot of us off hand, but i never see them used.
Always remember, if making an argument that revolves around HARD DATA, if anyone does any of these, fucking ignore them or call it out.

>>29843617
I love "The Texas Sharpshooter" it's so fucking funny
>Source includes tweets
LMAO

>>29789468
You fucking retard.
Institutions are. That was the whole point of my fucking thing.
You piece of shit pay attention fuck.
>>29789436
I don't see anything against what i said but you flinging Adhom.
BRING SOME REAL PEPPER TO THE KITCHEN PUNKS.
Once again, i pull out the pic of retard's bane.

>>29777039
It's not like you have proof.
You come in using Adhominem, then act surprised when you are met with tu quoque.
Make a real argument you stupid doublenigger and i'll gladly debate your anus open.

>>29753257
>They won
>Literally added 33 million to one stock
>117 million to another, and that's just yesterday.
I dare you to make your points without fallacy horseshit, i dare you.

>>29735447
>Comparing politics to money
People will fucking kill over much less money than you think. But you just want to compare this to the Q shit and use Fallacies to make your point.
So go ahead, let's hear it, compare business and politics.
Tell me how something that can be rigged and lied about is ANYTHING like data that is publically available and is literally shifting the market.
Please i'm waiting. No fallacies tho, i'll be grading you.

>>29727239
I don't give a rats ass.
You are dodging my main point, likely on purpose.
WHERE IS THE PROOF YOU NIGGAS DONE PAYED YO SHORTS.
There ain't none, and the data supports this.
IF you can give me reasons other than "Dude trust me" and "Muh evil jews" then maybe you will be taken seriously.
Until then fuck right the hell off.
You fuckers ALWAYS follow these, without a fucking doubt.

>>29701078
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GME/options?p=GME
>volume is up but price never rose with it, proving shorts are not covered
>massive calls across the board but you want to ignore them and say no evidence
>Institutions still own 200%
Get fucked Serb, you can try to use "Burden of Proof" all you want, but i'll pick your fallacies apart and mouth fuck you before you realize you've been had.
Checkmate, cunt.
I play an online lawyer simulator, don't fucking test me i will netpick you into the dirt.

>>29684853
Following your script perfectly, stop trying to appeal to purity, scotsman, no one gives a fuck.

>>29673440
Awe, missed me shills?
I missed you too. Let's hope you've upped your A-game and can stop shitting out fallacies to counter me.
Go ahead, i'm waiiiiiiiiiting.

>>29352772
>expecting anyone even pretend sealioning to adhere to logical standards.
God i wish, but again this list gets posted.
MAYBE SOMEDAY, i'll get my debate with a shill who can actually tell us /WHY/ it's not coming with evidence, and not bullshit...
But alas that day has yet to come.

>>29350618
>this fallacy cherrypicking shit again
>This nigga actually thinks he can hit me with special pleading
>This nigga does not get how stocks work.
You cannot make this shit up kek.
Make an argument without doing any of these and people might isten to you.

>>29333720
Do you even know what a hedge fund really is anon, or are you trying to pull the "no true scotsman" fallacy and imply you are some pure oldfag above such questions?
The logical fallacies are the only thing dipshits like you understand or use anyway.
You got anything other than special pleading, Ad Hominem, and aforementioned scotsman?
You wanna texas sharpshooter up some graphs and say this means they covered their shorts?
Go on, i'm waiting.
Do it faggot.

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GME
http://finra-markets.morningstar.com/MarketData/EquityOptions/detail.jsp?query=14%3A0P000002CH

>GameStop appoints Chief Technology Officer, 2 additional new Executives to push forward e-commerce and customer focused transformation
https://news.gamestop.com/news-releases/news-release-details/gamestop-appoints-chief-technology-officer

>Is the Squeeze Squoze?
https://squeeze.bonner.jp
https://wherearetheshares.com

>Real-Time Trades
https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/gme/latest-real-time-trades
https://eresearch.fidelity.com/eresearch/gotoBL/fidelityTopOrders.jhtml

>Trade Halts
http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=TradeHalts

>NYSE Short Restrictions
ftp://ftp.nyxdata.com/NYSEGroupSSRCircuitBreakers/NYSEGroupSSRCircuitBreakers_2021/
https://www.nyse.com/markets/nyse-arca/notices

>Most Shorted Stocks
https://financhill.com/most-heavily-shorted-stocks-today

Reminder that every single time you argue with the naysayers on GME, they /will/ fall into one of these fallacies. They have no real reason, logic or evidence to back their words, just cheap scare tactics and misinformation.
If anyone, any shill whatsoever can honestly supply evidence that the shorts can do anything but outright cheat their ways out, i am inviting you to do it.
You are so desperate to make us sell, or to mock us for it, but you offer no proof to inverse our hope.
You point to other stocks and try to make us focus on what we could be getting NOW, when you could be breaking our "Delusion".
But you can't, because you have nothing.
INB4 Ad Hominem because you can't scrape together a logical argument.

>>29232294
It's the "Not a true scotsman Fallacy"
Appealing to "Purity" for the sake of dismantling an argument.
Pathethic shit really.