You really need to allow a well thought and well presented research ideas on stock analysis which are qualitative in nature and does not adhere to a strict definition of value investing, which is arguably too narrow.
Qualitative analysis is just as much part of value investing as quantitative, even more so one could demonstrate.
You can still exercise moderation based on your personal evaluation of quality of a post - and i am clearly not challenging that, neither does reddit allow me.
Oh and i'm not suggesting purely qualitative analysis with no numbers to carry the argument - you can be absolutely required to translate your qualitative arguments FROM or TO quantitative context - something i missed in the first draft and folks pointed it out - rightly so.
Your main man Buffet on qualitative investing - "Interestingly enough, although I consider myself to be primarily in the quantitative school (and as I write this no one has come back from recess - I may be the only one left in the class), the really sensational ideas I have had over the years have been heavily weighted toward the qualitative side where I have had a "high-probability insight". This is what causes the cash register to really sing. However, it is an infrequent occurrence, as insights usually are, and, of course, no insight is required on the quantitative side - the figures should hit you over the head with a baseball bat. So the really big money tends to be made by investors who are right on qualitative decisions but, at least in my opinion, the more sure money tends to be made on the obvious quantitative decisions."
source - [https://www.reddit.com/r/BerkshireHathaway/comments/1uoxuph/buffett\_on\_qualitative\_investing\_the\_1967/](https://www.reddit.com/r/BerkshireHathaway/comments/1uoxuph/buffett_on_qualitative_investing_the_1967/)