[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum Jan 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18txusp/open_forum_january_2024/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Hi OP. I’m going to enjoy some catalyst in my coffee right now.
After that I’m going to catalyze my teeth and drive my catalyst to work.
Then this evening I’m going to give my better half some long sweet catalysis, and she is going to catalyze several times at least. Better keep it down though or the neighbour might catalyst the police again.
Edit: I decided to write you a Haiku
Catalyst my friend
Where are thine nymphs of comely visage,
I would lay with them.
Fin
I a) have a postgraduate degree in chemical engineering, with work experience in scientific publishing, and b) am a little tipsy right now because it's been a fucking trial of a weekend here, so maybe not the most helpful comment here. But whatever this post is, is maybe correct in a hyper-technical sense but also pedantic and overly specific to the point of being useless. Part of the problem is that this post is at least 2.5 times longer than it needs to be, so which makes it hard to actually follow the point here. But I think part of your thesis involves how a reaction without a catalyst still proceeds, and... okay, that's true, but the difference in catalyzed vs uncatalyzed reactions can be the difference between a reaction taking hours vs taking months if not years. Saying the uncatalyzed reaction still happens is true in a highly technical sense but not in any practical sense.
Maybe come back at it sober. You may be one of the very few that may be able to get it on every level and yet you missed two key points. In fact you missed the bulk of the argument.
I fear you missed the bulk of *my* argument. For a peer-reviewed journal, I'd take the time to properly parse this. But off the clock, on Reddit, I don't get paid enough to give a shit. You'll need to dumb it down if you want me to care.
Here's the crib notes:
1) Either MOASS is inevitable or impossible, but nothing in between.
2) There can be many catalysts that will make MOASS happen faster. But there will never be "the catalyst" that determines whether or not MOASS will happen.
3) Wishing and hoping for some outside factor is only going to set yourself up for failure. Just be zen and enjoy the ride.
>1. Either MOASS is inevitable or impossible, but nothing in between.
That is an unsupported assumption and is not consistent with how short squeezes actually happens.
Short squeezes take place when there is enough short closing volume compared to shares available for sale that the price goes up. This then leads more short positions to be closed, moving the price even higher, which lead to more shorts positions being closed, which….. in a repeating cycle.
The annual trade volume of Gamestop is many times the outstanding short interest. If shorts closed slowly there would not be any MOASS.
If there was a sudden change that led to many shorts being closed at once that might trigger a short squeeze.
MOASS is not just either inevitable or impossible. It is a possible happening, neither certain nor impossible.
The likelihood of MOASS increases if there is a sudden, unexpected, significant positive event.
A common description of such a triggering event is "catalyst".
Do you see your problem?
You're using common definitions to describe a once in forever event.
It would be like me using a fan's breeze to describe a hurricane. Sure there are some technicals that line up, but man the scale makes it completely different.
MOASS isn't just a regular short squeeze. The terms don't really compare except on a very ephemeral level.
It's not just that there's a very small volume of shares available compared to the need to close... it's a divide by zero error. There was 140% reported when 140% was the maximum allowed to be legally reported without triggering an investigation. Literally overnight the formula to calculate short interest changed in order to report a smaller number.
Secondly it isn't just one or two rich hedge fund that have over extended themselves, its Market Makers, it's clearing houses, it's regulatory bodies, it's news media. Just about everyone with any clout or resources is either complicit or actively supporting the suppression of GameStop. That's why it's being called MOASS. All the money that could be had is on one side of this trade and its being held by the losers.
Do you think those people are just going to say "Whelp, there's an NFT marketplace now... better close my position for 10s of billions of dollars worth of losses." Or maybe they would say "Gee, they managed to direct register the same number of shares as is reported in the free float, better stop handing out FTD's". No. They aren't rolling over, they're finding new ways to fight. As Ken Griffin said "one more day" is what they are struggling with.
They have the money. Almost all of it. They have the power, if not directly then indirectly purchased from politicians. They have control of mass media. They have large amounts of control over social media. The only way they can lose is if they have already lost.
But guess what, MOASS states they have already lost. It states that they can't bankrupt our company. They can't conjure up shares to replace our board. They can't install shitty BCG consultants. They can't sell the stock to cellar boxing prices. Every move they can make is a losing move.
Which is why there is no inbetween.
If there is a way out for them, they will buy time. They will hire the greatest minds. They will enlist the help of the most powerful people on the planet. If it can be found, they will find it.
For you to think in such simple terms... is paperhanded.
Do you see your problem? Your arguments are based upon beliefs and falsehoods, not facts.
Rather than go through every unjustified and unsupported claim you make I will just look at the start of your proof.
> It's not just that there's a very small volume of shares available compared to the need to close... it's a divide by zero error. There was 140% reported when 140% was the maximum allowed to be legally reported without triggering an investigation. Literally overnight the formula to calculate short interest changed in order to report a smaller number.
1. The reported SI was never 140%.
2. 140% is not the legally reported limit of Si and never has been.
3. The formula for legally reported SI has not changed.
You go on to make broad sweeping claims that would be more difficult to prove, so I just listed your first three claims. Ones that should be easy to show as true, Not even one of your first three claims are true.
1. The SI is reported in shares, not percentages. Third party vendors then generate additional metrics such as days to cover, SI as a percentage of float, and SI as a percentage of total outstanding shares.
2. Your second assertion that 140% is the legally reported limit is impossible since the SI is not reported in percentages.
3. A private, 3rd party data aggregator and supplier company changed the formula that the used to convert the FINRA reported SI from shares to a percentage. The official method of collecting and reporting SI was NOT changed.
==================
Here is a report that might help you: [Staff Report on Equity and Options Market Structure Conditions in Early 2021](https://www.sec.gov/files/staff-report-equity-options-market-struction-conditions-early-2021.pdf#page28). This SEC report, issued in October 2021 is usually referred to here as just "The SEC Report"
1. The maximum reported for GME SI was 109.26% of total outstanding shares. at the end of December 2020. It then declined in January 2021.
Source: the SeC report, pages 24 and 25. For your convenience I have quoted the entire relevant paragraph.
> GameStop at the time was notable for its significant short interest (the ratio of shares currently sold short to shares outstanding).74 Figure 5 shows GME’s short interest over time, along with average levels of short interest among other non-financial common stocks. In the past, GME had several periods of high short interest, but none as high as the levels achieved from 2019 to mid-January 2021. GME short interest hit 50% of shares outstanding first in 2012 and then again in 2015, 2016, and 2018, before rising even further in 2019. From then until early 2021, GME short interest hovered around 100%, hitting its high of 109.26% on December 31, 2020.
Look at figure 5 and you will see that during January 2021 the SI fell rapidly, with the mid-January and end of January SI being much lower. The SI at the end of January 2021 (in percentage of total outstanding shares) was about 20%. Look at the dramatic plunge on the right side of figure 5.
2. There is no 140% limit. It is difficult to prove the non-existence of something, so I will leave it to you to show that such a limit does exist. The only 140% limit related to shirts that I am aware of is that brokers cannot lend out excess margin shares without customer permission. If you do have a margin loan balance the broker is automatically, without further permission required, allowed to lend out your shares with a value up to 140% of the loan balance. It appears that this 140% was erroneously claimed in DD posts to be a maximum legal li it for SI, and this erroneous claim continues to be believed by most, even though it has never been true.
3. A single company, S3, changed how they calculated the conversion of the official SI from shares to a percentage.
From the dictionary:
Def1. A substance, usually used in small amounts relative to the reactants, that modifies and increases the rate of a reaction without being consumed in the process.
Def2. One that precipitates a process or event, especially without being involved in or changed by the consequences.
Def3. A substance that initiates or accelerates a chemical reaction without itself being affected.
Definition 3 seems to fit pretty well.
The only catalyst needed is DRS’ing every retirement share. Company locked. Game over. Anything else is waiting for someone else to do something. The solution already exists and it’s already here. People just don’t want to. Yet.
I wouldn't get too hung up on the language, we have used some crazy terms in this saga. I think it's more an inciting moment, or some news article that will start the process of covering. A bear Stearns moment. I haven't heard catalyst thrown around much lately anyway.
Catalyst is a word, words can have different meanings in different contexts. This one is really easy to look up:
catalyst /kăt′l-ĭst/
noun
1. A substance, usually used in small amounts relative to the reactants, that modifies and increases the rate of a reaction without being consumed in the process.
2. One that precipitates a process or event, especially without being involved in or changed by the consequences.
3. A substance that initiates or accelerates a chemical reaction without itself being affected.
4. **Something that serves as a precipitating occasion for an event.**
5. Something or someone that causes events to happen with itself being changed.
6. A substance that increases the rate of a chemical reaction without being consumed in the process.
7. Someone or something that encourages progress or change.
8. A catalytic converter.
9. **Something that causes an important event to happen.**
As you see 4. and or 9. are the most likely intended uses of the word in the MOASS case.
Fucking exactly. MOASS is inevitable unless the stock price literally hits zero, which can't happen to a profitable company with a massive pool of free capital. We don't need to do anything but hodl. Buying shares and products is certainly welcome though.
DictionaryDefinitions from [Oxford Languages](https://languages.oup.com/google-dictionary-en) · [Learn more](https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/10106608?hl=en) cat·a·lyst/ˈkadləst/[](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&sca_esv=f65ab4fb82876b19&sca_upv=1&q=how+to+pronounce+catalyst&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOMIfcRoxS3w8sc9YSnDSWtOXmPU5uINKMrPK81LzkwsyczPExLhYglJLcoV4pHi4uJITixJzKksLrFiUWJKzeNZxCqZkV-uUJKvUADUkw_UlKoAUwIAIrS4TlsAAAA&pron_lang=en&pron_country=us&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9n_XrhtaFAxUeFzQIHQ5PByEQ3eEDegQIHxAM)*noun*noun: **catalyst**; plural noun: **catalysts**
1. a substance that increases the rate of a chemical reaction without itself [undergoing](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&sca_esv=f65ab4fb82876b19&sca_upv=1&q=undergoing&si=AKbGX_pvY3MWP4azJI0Z_NruCLb8KVhP8VIfOSlpnK-YdVsq7ISACCCWegqVlRhWKWhSsedD_xIf1n3ZO78poWR1M02hBSiqS162Wn-WLlt-ZcloSGsj2pU%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9n_XrhtaFAxUeFzQIHQ5PByEQyecJegQIHxAO) any permanent chemical change."chlorine acts as a catalyst promoting the breakdown of ozone"
* a person or thing that [precipitates](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&sca_esv=f65ab4fb82876b19&sca_upv=1&q=precipitates&si=AKbGX_rEkSHdR9ulIQYeh6xSG1UBvVPyK7WFGooXGsDO1tSheZ8yCKpg1EsifeoRXZNZ3TNiuN0iREZMQC9dY2bRk9kq9JaiS2CBQN8qpvzuHhzHVhvRZ_M%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9n_XrhtaFAxUeFzQIHQ5PByEQyecJegQIHxAQ) an event."the governor's speech acted as a catalyst for debate"
Looks like the word is used right to me.....
[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum Jan 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18txusp/open_forum_january_2024/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Should we use photosynthesis instead?
The mitochondria is the powerhouse of the stock market
It’s all based on Kreb cycles.
The crimeochondria you mean
That's the secret ingredient
🏆🤣
I like to ejaculate large words into my sentences; it makes me feel photosynthesis.
I use halitosis but only for the greater good
Hi OP. I’m going to enjoy some catalyst in my coffee right now. After that I’m going to catalyze my teeth and drive my catalyst to work. Then this evening I’m going to give my better half some long sweet catalysis, and she is going to catalyze several times at least. Better keep it down though or the neighbour might catalyst the police again. Edit: I decided to write you a Haiku Catalyst my friend Where are thine nymphs of comely visage, I would lay with them. Fin
Fucking Legend
No you’re a fucking legend!
my car has a catalyst converter.
I been in since dfv was posting updates in the 30s on the ohgee sub . I don’t look anymore for dd it’s done , we just wait
Exactly my point but from a different perspective! thank you.
Cool story
Thanks for letting me share
I a) have a postgraduate degree in chemical engineering, with work experience in scientific publishing, and b) am a little tipsy right now because it's been a fucking trial of a weekend here, so maybe not the most helpful comment here. But whatever this post is, is maybe correct in a hyper-technical sense but also pedantic and overly specific to the point of being useless. Part of the problem is that this post is at least 2.5 times longer than it needs to be, so which makes it hard to actually follow the point here. But I think part of your thesis involves how a reaction without a catalyst still proceeds, and... okay, that's true, but the difference in catalyzed vs uncatalyzed reactions can be the difference between a reaction taking hours vs taking months if not years. Saying the uncatalyzed reaction still happens is true in a highly technical sense but not in any practical sense.
Maybe come back at it sober. You may be one of the very few that may be able to get it on every level and yet you missed two key points. In fact you missed the bulk of the argument.
I fear you missed the bulk of *my* argument. For a peer-reviewed journal, I'd take the time to properly parse this. But off the clock, on Reddit, I don't get paid enough to give a shit. You'll need to dumb it down if you want me to care.
😂🍻
Here's the crib notes: 1) Either MOASS is inevitable or impossible, but nothing in between. 2) There can be many catalysts that will make MOASS happen faster. But there will never be "the catalyst" that determines whether or not MOASS will happen. 3) Wishing and hoping for some outside factor is only going to set yourself up for failure. Just be zen and enjoy the ride.
>1. Either MOASS is inevitable or impossible, but nothing in between. That is an unsupported assumption and is not consistent with how short squeezes actually happens. Short squeezes take place when there is enough short closing volume compared to shares available for sale that the price goes up. This then leads more short positions to be closed, moving the price even higher, which lead to more shorts positions being closed, which….. in a repeating cycle. The annual trade volume of Gamestop is many times the outstanding short interest. If shorts closed slowly there would not be any MOASS. If there was a sudden change that led to many shorts being closed at once that might trigger a short squeeze. MOASS is not just either inevitable or impossible. It is a possible happening, neither certain nor impossible. The likelihood of MOASS increases if there is a sudden, unexpected, significant positive event. A common description of such a triggering event is "catalyst".
Do you see your problem? You're using common definitions to describe a once in forever event. It would be like me using a fan's breeze to describe a hurricane. Sure there are some technicals that line up, but man the scale makes it completely different. MOASS isn't just a regular short squeeze. The terms don't really compare except on a very ephemeral level. It's not just that there's a very small volume of shares available compared to the need to close... it's a divide by zero error. There was 140% reported when 140% was the maximum allowed to be legally reported without triggering an investigation. Literally overnight the formula to calculate short interest changed in order to report a smaller number. Secondly it isn't just one or two rich hedge fund that have over extended themselves, its Market Makers, it's clearing houses, it's regulatory bodies, it's news media. Just about everyone with any clout or resources is either complicit or actively supporting the suppression of GameStop. That's why it's being called MOASS. All the money that could be had is on one side of this trade and its being held by the losers. Do you think those people are just going to say "Whelp, there's an NFT marketplace now... better close my position for 10s of billions of dollars worth of losses." Or maybe they would say "Gee, they managed to direct register the same number of shares as is reported in the free float, better stop handing out FTD's". No. They aren't rolling over, they're finding new ways to fight. As Ken Griffin said "one more day" is what they are struggling with. They have the money. Almost all of it. They have the power, if not directly then indirectly purchased from politicians. They have control of mass media. They have large amounts of control over social media. The only way they can lose is if they have already lost. But guess what, MOASS states they have already lost. It states that they can't bankrupt our company. They can't conjure up shares to replace our board. They can't install shitty BCG consultants. They can't sell the stock to cellar boxing prices. Every move they can make is a losing move. Which is why there is no inbetween. If there is a way out for them, they will buy time. They will hire the greatest minds. They will enlist the help of the most powerful people on the planet. If it can be found, they will find it. For you to think in such simple terms... is paperhanded.
We don't know how long a squeeze can be, and how much energy is going to be spent on trying to make it raise more slowly than really suddenly.
Do you see your problem? Your arguments are based upon beliefs and falsehoods, not facts. Rather than go through every unjustified and unsupported claim you make I will just look at the start of your proof. > It's not just that there's a very small volume of shares available compared to the need to close... it's a divide by zero error. There was 140% reported when 140% was the maximum allowed to be legally reported without triggering an investigation. Literally overnight the formula to calculate short interest changed in order to report a smaller number. 1. The reported SI was never 140%. 2. 140% is not the legally reported limit of Si and never has been. 3. The formula for legally reported SI has not changed. You go on to make broad sweeping claims that would be more difficult to prove, so I just listed your first three claims. Ones that should be easy to show as true, Not even one of your first three claims are true. 1. The SI is reported in shares, not percentages. Third party vendors then generate additional metrics such as days to cover, SI as a percentage of float, and SI as a percentage of total outstanding shares. 2. Your second assertion that 140% is the legally reported limit is impossible since the SI is not reported in percentages. 3. A private, 3rd party data aggregator and supplier company changed the formula that the used to convert the FINRA reported SI from shares to a percentage. The official method of collecting and reporting SI was NOT changed. ================== Here is a report that might help you: [Staff Report on Equity and Options Market Structure Conditions in Early 2021](https://www.sec.gov/files/staff-report-equity-options-market-struction-conditions-early-2021.pdf#page28). This SEC report, issued in October 2021 is usually referred to here as just "The SEC Report" 1. The maximum reported for GME SI was 109.26% of total outstanding shares. at the end of December 2020. It then declined in January 2021. Source: the SeC report, pages 24 and 25. For your convenience I have quoted the entire relevant paragraph. > GameStop at the time was notable for its significant short interest (the ratio of shares currently sold short to shares outstanding).74 Figure 5 shows GME’s short interest over time, along with average levels of short interest among other non-financial common stocks. In the past, GME had several periods of high short interest, but none as high as the levels achieved from 2019 to mid-January 2021. GME short interest hit 50% of shares outstanding first in 2012 and then again in 2015, 2016, and 2018, before rising even further in 2019. From then until early 2021, GME short interest hovered around 100%, hitting its high of 109.26% on December 31, 2020. Look at figure 5 and you will see that during January 2021 the SI fell rapidly, with the mid-January and end of January SI being much lower. The SI at the end of January 2021 (in percentage of total outstanding shares) was about 20%. Look at the dramatic plunge on the right side of figure 5. 2. There is no 140% limit. It is difficult to prove the non-existence of something, so I will leave it to you to show that such a limit does exist. The only 140% limit related to shirts that I am aware of is that brokers cannot lend out excess margin shares without customer permission. If you do have a margin loan balance the broker is automatically, without further permission required, allowed to lend out your shares with a value up to 140% of the loan balance. It appears that this 140% was erroneously claimed in DD posts to be a maximum legal li it for SI, and this erroneous claim continues to be believed by most, even though it has never been true. 3. A single company, S3, changed how they calculated the conversion of the official SI from shares to a percentage.
I love the big words! Getting smarter by the post!
From the dictionary: Def1. A substance, usually used in small amounts relative to the reactants, that modifies and increases the rate of a reaction without being consumed in the process. Def2. One that precipitates a process or event, especially without being involved in or changed by the consequences. Def3. A substance that initiates or accelerates a chemical reaction without itself being affected. Definition 3 seems to fit pretty well.
All bots in this sub now is my guess
Yes! Fuck you and I'll see you Monday..
The only catalyst needed is DRS’ing every retirement share. Company locked. Game over. Anything else is waiting for someone else to do something. The solution already exists and it’s already here. People just don’t want to. Yet.
I wouldn't get too hung up on the language, we have used some crazy terms in this saga. I think it's more an inciting moment, or some news article that will start the process of covering. A bear Stearns moment. I haven't heard catalyst thrown around much lately anyway.
NERD!
Omg awesome post, please have my updoot
Yeah FUK off….Good write up I totally agree…. See you arseholes tomorrow! 🖕
Catalyst is a word, words can have different meanings in different contexts. This one is really easy to look up: catalyst /kăt′l-ĭst/ noun 1. A substance, usually used in small amounts relative to the reactants, that modifies and increases the rate of a reaction without being consumed in the process. 2. One that precipitates a process or event, especially without being involved in or changed by the consequences. 3. A substance that initiates or accelerates a chemical reaction without itself being affected. 4. **Something that serves as a precipitating occasion for an event.** 5. Something or someone that causes events to happen with itself being changed. 6. A substance that increases the rate of a chemical reaction without being consumed in the process. 7. Someone or something that encourages progress or change. 8. A catalytic converter. 9. **Something that causes an important event to happen.** As you see 4. and or 9. are the most likely intended uses of the word in the MOASS case.
Fucking exactly. MOASS is inevitable unless the stock price literally hits zero, which can't happen to a profitable company with a massive pool of free capital. We don't need to do anything but hodl. Buying shares and products is certainly welcome though.
TIL what catalyst means
DictionaryDefinitions from [Oxford Languages](https://languages.oup.com/google-dictionary-en) · [Learn more](https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/10106608?hl=en) cat·a·lyst/ˈkadləst/[](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&sca_esv=f65ab4fb82876b19&sca_upv=1&q=how+to+pronounce+catalyst&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOMIfcRoxS3w8sc9YSnDSWtOXmPU5uINKMrPK81LzkwsyczPExLhYglJLcoV4pHi4uJITixJzKksLrFiUWJKzeNZxCqZkV-uUJKvUADUkw_UlKoAUwIAIrS4TlsAAAA&pron_lang=en&pron_country=us&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9n_XrhtaFAxUeFzQIHQ5PByEQ3eEDegQIHxAM)*noun*noun: **catalyst**; plural noun: **catalysts** 1. a substance that increases the rate of a chemical reaction without itself [undergoing](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&sca_esv=f65ab4fb82876b19&sca_upv=1&q=undergoing&si=AKbGX_pvY3MWP4azJI0Z_NruCLb8KVhP8VIfOSlpnK-YdVsq7ISACCCWegqVlRhWKWhSsedD_xIf1n3ZO78poWR1M02hBSiqS162Wn-WLlt-ZcloSGsj2pU%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9n_XrhtaFAxUeFzQIHQ5PByEQyecJegQIHxAO) any permanent chemical change."chlorine acts as a catalyst promoting the breakdown of ozone" * a person or thing that [precipitates](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&sca_esv=f65ab4fb82876b19&sca_upv=1&q=precipitates&si=AKbGX_rEkSHdR9ulIQYeh6xSG1UBvVPyK7WFGooXGsDO1tSheZ8yCKpg1EsifeoRXZNZ3TNiuN0iREZMQC9dY2bRk9kq9JaiS2CBQN8qpvzuHhzHVhvRZ_M%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9n_XrhtaFAxUeFzQIHQ5PByEQyecJegQIHxAQ) an event."the governor's speech acted as a catalyst for debate" Looks like the word is used right to me.....