It's why being a Mod sucks . To throttle between say a decent poster who has a bad day / thread vs infiltrators (real and imagined) vs people who are reporting 20 threads because another poster pissed them off vs 'ZOMG Free Speech 100%ers' etc all the meanwhile decisions being public are 2nd guessed and 10 decisions a minute- and BTW it's a volunteer job.
Well it's on the sidebar, I'm being redundant. Actually the phone version doesn't have the sidebar displayed like it is on the PC. So maybe redundancy is okay sometimes. :P
Its going to be Biblical, if you skip to close to the second coming, it is clear that things are going to get worse before they get better. God wants as many save as possible and Q has said many times its going to be Biblical.
Im sorry but i dont understand this line of thinking. The only real question that you should be asking yourself, because no one can convince you through and through except you, is this: Do you believe Joe Bidan is really in DC in the white house and running the country OR have you seen the mountains of overwhelming evidence that he is not in DC and not at the real WH? If its the former then theres nothing we can do to help and if its the latter then sit back grab some popcorn and enjoy the show, Patriots are in control.
In the vast majority of cases, banning is too extreme. I completely applaud evspra for what he did. The guy deserves a medal as far as I'm concerned. The fact that he was pushed out is inexcusable. Even with all of that, I can admit that banning of all things GeorgeNews was probably a misstep on his part. But there are ways to engage with mods and state that cordially, rather than pushing them to quit.
With regard to George New, I think only those posts which attempt to decode Q messages and such using GN timestamps or content should be banned. Why? Because those posts ACTIVELY mislead people. If you are just stating an opinion, no matter distasteful it may be to me, you, or everyone else, banning is a bad, bad thing.
So I may not like the N word. But banning people for it is a slippery slope we should not head down. I may dislike George News now, but unless someone attempts to link a GN post to Q, or push a philosophy onto others that GN is relevant to Q or Trump, then a post has no reason to be banned.
Personal opinions, and posts which clearly express nothing more than a personal opinion, however distateful that opinion may be, should NEVER be banned. That is a canon that the entire GAW community should be able to get behind.
If not, then what are struggling for? Just let the deep state take over and tell us what we are allowed to believe, what we are allowed to say publicly, and how we are allowed to act. That seems to be what some people around here are pushing for when they praise the banning culture.
Banning is a serious thing. Treat it as the serious thing it is and I think we'll all be fine.
So you feel like it's acceptable to post off topic information here?
No bans were made of discussion of GN. The parameters you mentioned
"With regard to George New, I think only those posts which attempt to decode Q messages and such using GN timestamps or content should be banned."
is what was going to be banned. Posts that were going to "ACTIVELY mislead people."
Should shills ever be banned? Or should they be allowed to spam their "Personal opinions, and posts which clearly express nothing more than a personal opinion" to the detriment of the forum?
Obviously the posts need to be on topic. We don't people posting cooking recipes here. I'm sorry if that was not clear. But, in answer to your question, shills have as much right to express their opinions as everyone else. So long as they are making on topic posts, then yes. Shills should be allowed to state their opinions. If I get tired of seeing them, I can block them.
That is a good question. I think everyone will have a different tolerance. Which is why we need more education about how to use the "block" button. Possibly a curated list of blocked accounts that we can elect to subscribe to, as opposed to an outright ban. Similar to how SPAM filtering works.
Have you ever been to a club, like a birdwatching club? I'm a birdwatcher. I bring my binoculars and field guide. I don't bring an electric guitar. It's annoying to the birds. And it doesn't, you know, make sense? Maybe shills would be better served in forums where their opinions, you know, make more sense? Especially seeing as there are SO MANY other options and we really only have a few options for exclusively Q research. Just a thought.
Good to look at analogies. That is how we learn and see patterns. Not sure that one fits though. An electric guitar in a bird watching club is completely off topic. The same would apply here. Posts have to be on topic. Perhaps a better analogy would be a guy who came to the bird watching club and continually stated that looking at small birds was stupid and all the good, large birds had left. Now imagine a bunch of his friends said that too. A group of them doing nothing but moaning that we should all go home now. That would be annoying, but still arguably on topic.
How would you deal with that situation? Do you ban them from the club for having an annoying opinion that differs from yours? Or do you develop techniques to ignore them? Such as moving to a different area of the field where you can watch the birds in peace. I don't disagree people can be very annoying. Especially ones who seem to hold very different opinions, or shills voicing truly different opinions. But banning is an extreme form of enforcing order. There are other options that don't involve such draconian actions that need to be considered.
“a guy who came to the bird watching club and continually stated that looking at small birds was stupid and all the good, large birds had left. Now imagine a bunch of his friends said that too. A group of them doing nothing but moaning that we should all go home now. That would be annoying...
.., Do you ban them from the club for having an annoying opinion that differs from yours?”
Some of the new people still have the show me or the prove it type of mentality. In person a guy came to pay rent in a mask. I told him a bunch of facts as fast as I could, I was in the mood I didn't give a spit. He got mad and said prove it, I said NO, don't believe what I say. Don't believe what anyone says, investigate for yourself. He said I will and then I smiled and said just don't use google, you might have luck with duck duck go.
What got him to actually listen is one of the things someone here found awhile ago. I had looked it up and at the time was true that you have twice the chance of getting hit by lightening than dying of covid.
This post is gay. People are lazy and have lost the power of discernment.
Censorship is what they do on the "other" platforms. Just deport and move on.
It's why being a Mod sucks . To throttle between say a decent poster who has a bad day / thread vs infiltrators (real and imagined) vs people who are reporting 20 threads because another poster pissed them off vs 'ZOMG Free Speech 100%ers' etc all the meanwhile decisions being public are 2nd guessed and 10 decisions a minute- and BTW it's a volunteer job.
Huge respect for the mods. It's not only a thankless job, it's a job receiving endless grief and insults.
This should be so obvious that it goes without saying.
But thank you for saying it anyways.
Well it's on the sidebar, I'm being redundant. Actually the phone version doesn't have the sidebar displayed like it is on the PC. So maybe redundancy is okay sometimes. :P
I love how this post gets parasitic shills attached to it like leeches.
Its going to be Biblical, if you skip to close to the second coming, it is clear that things are going to get worse before they get better. God wants as many save as possible and Q has said many times its going to be Biblical.
are u serious
The plan is still in play, a visible sign is the razor wire around DC.
when that comes down, that would indicate some type of event has been completed.
Im sorry but i dont understand this line of thinking. The only real question that you should be asking yourself, because no one can convince you through and through except you, is this: Do you believe Joe Bidan is really in DC in the white house and running the country OR have you seen the mountains of overwhelming evidence that he is not in DC and not at the real WH? If its the former then theres nothing we can do to help and if its the latter then sit back grab some popcorn and enjoy the show, Patriots are in control.
In the vast majority of cases, banning is too extreme. I completely applaud evspra for what he did. The guy deserves a medal as far as I'm concerned. The fact that he was pushed out is inexcusable. Even with all of that, I can admit that banning of all things GeorgeNews was probably a misstep on his part. But there are ways to engage with mods and state that cordially, rather than pushing them to quit.
With regard to George New, I think only those posts which attempt to decode Q messages and such using GN timestamps or content should be banned. Why? Because those posts ACTIVELY mislead people. If you are just stating an opinion, no matter distasteful it may be to me, you, or everyone else, banning is a bad, bad thing.
So I may not like the N word. But banning people for it is a slippery slope we should not head down. I may dislike George News now, but unless someone attempts to link a GN post to Q, or push a philosophy onto others that GN is relevant to Q or Trump, then a post has no reason to be banned.
Personal opinions, and posts which clearly express nothing more than a personal opinion, however distateful that opinion may be, should NEVER be banned. That is a canon that the entire GAW community should be able to get behind.
If not, then what are struggling for? Just let the deep state take over and tell us what we are allowed to believe, what we are allowed to say publicly, and how we are allowed to act. That seems to be what some people around here are pushing for when they praise the banning culture.
Banning is a serious thing. Treat it as the serious thing it is and I think we'll all be fine.
He wasn't pushed out
So you feel like it's acceptable to post off topic information here?
No bans were made of discussion of GN. The parameters you mentioned
"With regard to George New, I think only those posts which attempt to decode Q messages and such using GN timestamps or content should be banned."
is what was going to be banned. Posts that were going to "ACTIVELY mislead people."
Should shills ever be banned? Or should they be allowed to spam their "Personal opinions, and posts which clearly express nothing more than a personal opinion" to the detriment of the forum?
Obviously the posts need to be on topic. We don't people posting cooking recipes here. I'm sorry if that was not clear. But, in answer to your question, shills have as much right to express their opinions as everyone else. So long as they are making on topic posts, then yes. Shills should be allowed to state their opinions. If I get tired of seeing them, I can block them.
What concentration of shills is acceptable for you?
That is a good question. I think everyone will have a different tolerance. Which is why we need more education about how to use the "block" button. Possibly a curated list of blocked accounts that we can elect to subscribe to, as opposed to an outright ban. Similar to how SPAM filtering works.
Have you ever been to a club, like a birdwatching club? I'm a birdwatcher. I bring my binoculars and field guide. I don't bring an electric guitar. It's annoying to the birds. And it doesn't, you know, make sense? Maybe shills would be better served in forums where their opinions, you know, make more sense? Especially seeing as there are SO MANY other options and we really only have a few options for exclusively Q research. Just a thought.
Good to look at analogies. That is how we learn and see patterns. Not sure that one fits though. An electric guitar in a bird watching club is completely off topic. The same would apply here. Posts have to be on topic. Perhaps a better analogy would be a guy who came to the bird watching club and continually stated that looking at small birds was stupid and all the good, large birds had left. Now imagine a bunch of his friends said that too. A group of them doing nothing but moaning that we should all go home now. That would be annoying, but still arguably on topic.
How would you deal with that situation? Do you ban them from the club for having an annoying opinion that differs from yours? Or do you develop techniques to ignore them? Such as moving to a different area of the field where you can watch the birds in peace. I don't disagree people can be very annoying. Especially ones who seem to hold very different opinions, or shills voicing truly different opinions. But banning is an extreme form of enforcing order. There are other options that don't involve such draconian actions that need to be considered.
If these people came to my birdwatching club-
“a guy who came to the bird watching club and continually stated that looking at small birds was stupid and all the good, large birds had left. Now imagine a bunch of his friends said that too. A group of them doing nothing but moaning that we should all go home now. That would be annoying...
.., Do you ban them from the club for having an annoying opinion that differs from yours?”
I think I would ban them from the club yes :)
Btw this is the funniest thing I have seen today-
"a curated list of blocked accounts that we can elect to subscribe to"
really? I'm not sure there's a huge market for that. lol.
100% agree. Freeze peach shills can fuck off
"free speech", if it's on topic. The topic is Q.
Some of the new people still have the show me or the prove it type of mentality. In person a guy came to pay rent in a mask. I told him a bunch of facts as fast as I could, I was in the mood I didn't give a spit. He got mad and said prove it, I said NO, don't believe what I say. Don't believe what anyone says, investigate for yourself. He said I will and then I smiled and said just don't use google, you might have luck with duck duck go.
What got him to actually listen is one of the things someone here found awhile ago. I had looked it up and at the time was true that you have twice the chance of getting hit by lightening than dying of covid.
This post is gay. People are lazy and have lost the power of discernment. Censorship is what they do on the "other" platforms. Just deport and move on.
What do you think the deport button eventually does?
Sorry for fagging around :P
How about absolutely fucking no