This method of analysis seems to have two problems. The first is a philosophical one and the second a practical one. The first reason why a QAnon plan cannot succeed is because QAnon is an individualistic idea and only a QAnon approach can make sense to a single individual. The second reason is that a QAnon approach to corruption is a very narrow approach.

When a group of people get together to decide what is best to do, they have individual goals and values in mind. There is no reason why those individuals cannot agree on what is best. But when they get together to decide what is best to do, one individual becomes the QAnon expert who then decides to make the plan for everyone.

It is a very narrow approach to corruption and it just does not work. The individuals who comprise a QAnon project have a problem with the approach because of its narrow perspective and therefore cannot see a larger picture that involves multiple individuals. The individuals become "the experts". And the problem does not just end here. The larger picture and the larger picture requires multiple perspectives and multiple opinions. And that brings us to the practical problem. The larger picture requires that we have a method to deal with multiple opinions and perspectives. And that requires using consensus. The consensus process (or as I call it the Q consensus) is another method of dealing with multiple perspectives and opinions. The point of consensus is that those who are doing the work have a process to reach consensus about what is best. And that is the point of consensus.

The consensus process is an agreement method that takes into account two basic assumptions: (1) All people want what is best; and (2) Everyone can agree about what is best. And (1) is the first prerequisite for the use of consensus as a method to make an attempt to accomplish something. The method then uses the fact that people can agree about what is best to try to accomplish an agreed upon goal. As you have heard, that goal is not just some vague idea. That goal is to achieve a certain value or outcome. And that value or outcome has two possible outputs. One is a "good" outcome. The other is a "bad" outcome. But what is it that people want to achieve? We can make a rough guess by looking at what people want to achieve. And what does each person want to achieve? Well, people want to achieve a certain level of security. And this is the first assumption that the consensus method goes by. What happens if someone wants to accomplish more than what the consensus method would be able to accomplish? That person has an additional input to the process. And this additional input is that person's perception or belief about what people want and what the level of security is that each person is looking for. And the consensus method is going to take into account that additional input in some way. All of that is then fed into the second assumption. That people can agree on what is best. And the consensus method is then going to attempt to achieve the highest possible level of security with as few people as possible. It is very difficult to say what this means when you look at it through the lens of the way people think. And that is exactly what you are going to have to do.