>>54693157That's kind of what it feels like to me. Some of the classifications make sense I guess, but some I just cant imagine why they did it the way they did.
Like how can you justify putting runoxi as inclining and fuwacoco as declining? Looking at it zoomed out to the 180 day range it seems strange. (even if you ignore the sullygnome trend line which is complete garbage, which you should) Were they just looking from a 1 month date range? Seems like a kind of myopic way to do data analysis.
