It is #BellLetsTalk ...so let’s talk. Have you ever responded to the question “how are you doing?” with a “fine” or “good” even though you really weren’t fine or good?! I know I certainly have.

One fascist to watch in 2021 is Joseph Charles "Oakman" Golinske of SE MI. He's been a Proud Boy for a couple years, but took a break recently from the group and promotes himself through the "Oak Nation" channel on Telegram.

Most people may be familiar with him as the tall guy in the Proud Boys bridge shot, from their August 17, 2019 attack on Portland, which featured an American Guard bus trying (and failing) to bludgeon antifascists with hammers.

He was also with his g/f at the time (Dominique Tota, left of Tarrio), and that's definitely a twitter account folks will want to block/report because he posts on it.

He's been plenty active at the pro-Covid/anti-mask/ReOpen protests in Lansing MI, seen here with Jerry Wayne and an effigy of Gretchen Whitmer, who his militia friends tried to kidnap and publicly execute.

Outside of the Proud Boys, his solo "career" with Oak Nation features the same misogyny, classism and gateway to far-right domestic terrorism the Proud Boys themselves feature. Here's him peddling oxychlorinque and bragging about harassing service workers.

#Suven – Journey of my first 50 bagger…

I bought #Suven first in Apr 2013 around Rs 20…today after almost 7.5 years, its Rs 1000 (Suven pharma 920 adjusted for bonus + Suven Life 80)..CAGR of almost 68% for 7.5 years. I am fortunate to hold it throughout the journey and

1/n

add on multiple occasions on way up. Like to share my experience in this thread for everyone’s benefit..

First time I bought because I like the management focus on R&D. It had chosen the most difficult therapeutic area in pharma which is CNS and it was investing the cash

2/n

flow it used to earn from CRAMS. It also used to write off all the R&D expenses in the P&L instead of capitalizing it in BS. That gave me lot of comfort about management quality.

I kept on adding as funds keep coming. I remember giving a public presentation on Suven in

3/n

Mumbai at one analyst meet in Nov 2017 when it was trading at Rs 160. There was a huge call option embedded at that time in the form of SUVN-502. That would have been the blockbuster molecule if succeeded with market potential of $10 Bn plus..result was due in Dec 2019,

4/n

I loaded around 250-300 knowing the value of CRAMS business itself is more than 300.

SUVN-502 failed in phase-II trials, stock was down 15% from 300 to 250 in a single day, I added heavily. it was largest allocation in my portfolio because I knew the value of CRAMS business

5/n

1) Dreaded thread on why I think the response to postcritique is so vitriolic. Short version: Because literary studies is a discipline in search of an application.

2) Before I go on, I'll say from the outset that many in lit studies explicitly reject the idea that the field *should* have an application. My opinion is that's fine if you want to do book clubs, but if you want an institution you can't ignore that difficult issue. But anyway...

3) The evidence by this point is overwhelming that when lit scholars talk about 'method' we're actually just talking about ourselves: 'ways of reading,' 'how we argue,' 'phenomenology of reading,' etc. etc.

4) David Kurnick nicely illustrates this phenomenon:

5) But none of this is method discussion. Talking about ourselves, how we approach our objects of study, our motives and objectives, our commitments, etc. would be the *beginning* of a method convo in every other discipline. In lit studies it's the *end*, or the whole convo!

There is a highly instructive symposium on "Veil of Ignorance" #ProcessTracing in the new @APSAtweets QMMR publication https://t.co/nxqEQ9HaRz There is lots to say ab it. For now, I want to focus on whether (causal) qualitative research has a problem w/ confirmation bias that 1/

needs to be addressed.
In short, Veil of Ignorance process tracing aims to blindfold the data collectors and analysts to the hypotheses to reduce risk of confirmation bias.
Proposal receives a lot of criticism by all respondents, partly for valid reasons, partly not, IMO 2/

If there was no bigger issue with confirmation bias, there would not be much benefit in talking about blinding in qualitative research.
As Beach notes, the intro to the symposium does not present evidence that bias is a problem. This is correct, but there is also no evidence 3/

that confirmation bias is not a problem. It's an absence of evidence situation with regard to comprehensive, direct evidence, i.e. from verification studies of qualitative research (for studies that are built on an epistemology for which the idea of verification makes sense). 4/

However, I'd say there is circumstantial evidence that confirmation bias is a problem.
1) Evidence for confirmation bias in quantitative research: The developments around #OpenScience and transparency in quantitative research in different disciplines present diverse evidence 5/