#SRF any similarity in chart pattern!? 🧐 Remember, this was my trigger from list of 3 stocks in watchlist.
Today, don't ask me for new watchlist - I will be mostly 'Watching' 😏 https://t.co/0BeDHtB55r

#SAIL Directionally it is headed to 140/150 levels next over short period of time. SL - todays low pic.twitter.com/1IE4eJn9px
— Dare2Dream (@Dare2Dr10109801) April 13, 2021
More from Dare2Dream
#BalajiAmines Breaking out now!!!
#BalajiAmine Retest done?
#BalajiAmines Stock in consolidation with volumes drying up. A move above 2855 with volumes, this multi-bagger could still make decent gains from here in near term. Stops 2740. #Dare2Drm https://t.co/7r61sO7o5h pic.twitter.com/V8riCxg96k
— Dare2Dream (@Dare2Dr10109801) July 10, 2021
#BalajiAmine Retest done?

More from Sail
#SAIL Break out started yesterday. Around 136/138 there is some resistance. A daily close above those levels, the stock is ready to head to 151 / 180 levels next
#Metals
#Metals
#Sail Hourly Chart. We could see sellers run for cover above 126. Levels of 120 could be my stop on this one. #Metals pic.twitter.com/2CNvUZbhNY
— Dare2Dream (@Dare2Dr10109801) June 10, 2021
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x