A variety of content is fine, I don't believe that's what NanaQ45 is concerned about.

She's concerned about the number of posts positing ideas that have no firm connection to events, proof or reality. There's a lack of critical thinking and diligence.

One example, albeit an extreme one: The obsession that a small number of posters have with the idea that JFK Jr. is still alive. I've even seen a mod on here promote this idea. There's zero evidence to support this theory, Q has in no uncertain terms stated that JFK Jr. is no longer with us and worse, those types of discussion topics are used against us in the mainstream to paint us as lunatics.

Variety is fine as there's a broad tapestry of events that lead to the great awakening. But it is disheartening to some of us to see ideas posited in serious threads with no connection to reality. Equally so to see things stated as fact that are far from it.

I don't want to interpret NQ45's words for her, but my take away is that her request is for better research and more critical thinking, and I think that the addition of both would be a positive development for this board.

Your last point about everyone being in their own stage of awakening is a very good one. We must be gracious with each other. On the other hand I understand Nana's concern, but even though I understand it, I don't necessarily agree with the level of hysteria (in CAPITAL LETTERS). We are not going to get a break from the compromised media no matter what we do. Every post could be serious and well-researched with a thousand credible sources, and they would still call us idiots and conspiracy theorists. I'd say, don't worry about it. Bad press is still press, and it brings Cinderella to the ball.

I notice two things: 1. Nana is not calling for censorship but for self-regulation, and 2. that self-regulation is all about things Nana judges to be unworthy of this forum. I get what Nana is saying. I understand that optics are a thing, but although it might be good to consider the impact of a proposition, we shouldn't be censoring ourselves because we might be harshly judged. That is what the PC crowd are taught to do in socialist university, and it does not lead to the truth, which is what we are all searching to uncover and present to the world.

I personally like the variety of content here––and the variety of opinion. I also like people being able to say "you are wrong" in a civil context. I do not like it when the discourse becomes uncivil between ourselves, and I think that reflects badly on us when it happens. Of course, I'm not talking about the treatment of glowing shills who come in here to start trouble. Let them get what they deserve. But in terms of GA population, I think we should make a distinction between actual doomers who think we're all in a handbag and won't be convinced otherwise, and people who have just gotten discouraged and need a bit of help to get up and get back in the fight.

It's not such a bad idea to take a personal inventory from time to time to see how well we cling to the courses we set for ourselves. Posts like this one open that conversation, and I don't think it's a bad thing. Having said that, it is my opinion that it makes no sense to look to lying media organizations to legitimize us. We do not receive our legitimacy from them. They receive the proof of their illegitimacy from us.

Ditto, Jules.