Q wanted us to date fag. He/they positively encouraged it. That was the whole point of the Q operation - to fool the bad guys into thinking that something was going to happen and forcing them to play their hand prematurely.
Waking the sheeples was a secondary operation. But I agree that it should be the priority now and date fagging is no longer needed - which is why Q stopped posting. Q is not going to give ANY clue as to what will happen or when.
I think with CPAC going on right now is a great time for self-reflection. We each need to examine our expectations and be truthful about what we base them on. Hope is good but hope untethered to reality is not helpful. I expect a massive amount of dooming to happen here tomorrow evening after Trump's CPAC speech when people don't hear all that they want to hear. This is a marathon not a sprint...... a power shift such as we hope for takes time.
I just released a maxed-out post about Q's instructions to "paint the picture" in exactly the conspiratorial way, and his reasons for doing so. We all know this means there will be mistakes and some groupthink to "sift" through as we bake our bread, and that is an accepted sideline of free thought. The best analyses rise to the top. Q also instructed that timestamps and other references are important (usually not digital sums, which are the poor man's gematria), and seems to have knowledge of when certain events (CPAC) can be forced to be coordinated to occur (Trump's speech on the 4th anniversary of his Joint Session speech; not a direct Q proof, but a proof of coordination among white hats).
The focus of my research is that we should be constantly memorializing our discoveries in new graphics (which defeat anti-propagation measures of the deep state) and that we are free to ignore the chaff because our efforts will suffice for "daily bread". If an emotional appeal (even a sticky) is particularly egregious, state why with calm facts and logic and message the moderators, who have also nobly moderated themselves when they push a policy a bit too far.
"Future proves past" can just as easily mean that the future proves that some disinformation happened in the past. shrugs. All we can do is keep an open mind, and keep learning.
You can't win "everyone" over no matter what you do and how you do it. Those who are truly curious and open-minded will come here and do their research. That's how they will become informed. Those who come to laugh will find reasons to laugh because they aren't really interested in the truth
Frankly, I think it's because not everyone is autistic enough for the chans.
Q went to the chans for a reason. Shitty ideas there get ignored and slide straight off the board. They did all the hard work, all the heavy lifting. Everything's anonymous so ego isn't involved. But Q's message of weaponized autism needs to be spread; so that autism needs to be diffused to the autistically-impaired.
Now Q is everywhere; reaching a wider audience. We're watching the plan unfold, but the actual autistic research isn't as important anymore: so we get everyone chiming in with dumbass theories and since they're neither autistic nor anonymous they get their feelings hurt.
I know a lot of you will argue that the quantity of people
Is your name Sweeney Todd? You nearly made me puke. You can say "quantity of sugar" and "quantity of flower" but if you say "quantity of people", it implies that they are minced up!
The truth, the culture emerges from the free action of individual contributions. You seem to be advocating a form of censorship. We are for liberty at this basic level. If you like you upvote, if not then the idea fades.
By all means comment to those posts you find objectionable, perhaps your view will hold sway, perhaps not. Ephemeral theories die on their own, they do not require censorship.
This is what the entire movement was created off of. People brainstorming, discovering things, sharing things that they have found.
It's called brainstorming.
That's called datefagging. I haven't seen a datefagging post materialize. All the revelations come after the fact.
Q wanted us to date fag. He/they positively encouraged it. That was the whole point of the Q operation - to fool the bad guys into thinking that something was going to happen and forcing them to play their hand prematurely.
Waking the sheeples was a secondary operation. But I agree that it should be the priority now and date fagging is no longer needed - which is why Q stopped posting. Q is not going to give ANY clue as to what will happen or when.
I think with CPAC going on right now is a great time for self-reflection. We each need to examine our expectations and be truthful about what we base them on. Hope is good but hope untethered to reality is not helpful. I expect a massive amount of dooming to happen here tomorrow evening after Trump's CPAC speech when people don't hear all that they want to hear. This is a marathon not a sprint...... a power shift such as we hope for takes time.
Expectations can be our biggest enemy. Maturity understands that and tempers expectation with knowledge and seeks balance.
Maybe some people are trying to lead us down a path of distraction?
I just released a maxed-out post about Q's instructions to "paint the picture" in exactly the conspiratorial way, and his reasons for doing so. We all know this means there will be mistakes and some groupthink to "sift" through as we bake our bread, and that is an accepted sideline of free thought. The best analyses rise to the top. Q also instructed that timestamps and other references are important (usually not digital sums, which are the poor man's gematria), and seems to have knowledge of when certain events (CPAC) can be forced to be coordinated to occur (Trump's speech on the 4th anniversary of his Joint Session speech; not a direct Q proof, but a proof of coordination among white hats).
The focus of my research is that we should be constantly memorializing our discoveries in new graphics (which defeat anti-propagation measures of the deep state) and that we are free to ignore the chaff because our efforts will suffice for "daily bread". If an emotional appeal (even a sticky) is particularly egregious, state why with calm facts and logic and message the moderators, who have also nobly moderated themselves when they push a policy a bit too far.
If future proves past, then those posts from Q were meant for future reference, no? Project looking glass?
"Future proves past" can just as easily mean that the future proves that some disinformation happened in the past. shrugs. All we can do is keep an open mind, and keep learning.
I'm much more concerned about people like you who are so worried about what the opposition thinks of us. This isn't a popularity contest.
You can't win "everyone" over no matter what you do and how you do it. Those who are truly curious and open-minded will come here and do their research. That's how they will become informed. Those who come to laugh will find reasons to laugh because they aren't really interested in the truth
I 100% agree.
Frankly, I think it's because not everyone is autistic enough for the chans.
Q went to the chans for a reason. Shitty ideas there get ignored and slide straight off the board. They did all the hard work, all the heavy lifting. Everything's anonymous so ego isn't involved. But Q's message of weaponized autism needs to be spread; so that autism needs to be diffused to the autistically-impaired.
Now Q is everywhere; reaching a wider audience. We're watching the plan unfold, but the actual autistic research isn't as important anymore: so we get everyone chiming in with dumbass theories and since they're neither autistic nor anonymous they get their feelings hurt.
Is your name Sweeney Todd? You nearly made me puke. You can say "quantity of sugar" and "quantity of flower" but if you say "quantity of people", it implies that they are minced up!
It should be the "number of people".
Anyway, carry on. You distracted me.
The truth, the culture emerges from the free action of individual contributions. You seem to be advocating a form of censorship. We are for liberty at this basic level. If you like you upvote, if not then the idea fades.
By all means comment to those posts you find objectionable, perhaps your view will hold sway, perhaps not. Ephemeral theories die on their own, they do not require censorship.