Reading up on Avi Itzkovich and trying to understand the context

[blueLatch]

From a forum perspective, I think this is a good example of how to handle uncertainty. Instead of arguing positions, people are comparing impressions and methods. That is far more useful in the long run. If someone later finds court records or regulatory outcomes, those can be discussed on their own terms. Until then, staying tentative feels responsible.Overall, I see this more as an exercise in critical reading than an investigation.

 

[red_hollow]

What keeps me cautious about forming any opinion is how often narratives get shaped by selective emphasis. You can take a handful of facts from public records and make them sound concerning or completely harmless depending on how you frame them. Without a neutral timeline or direct documentation explaining roles and responsibilities, interpretation does most of the work. That is why I think discussions like this should always stay provisional. It is better to admit we do not know than to pretend we do.I also wonder how many readers actually go back to primary sources versus relying on commentary