The tripcoded q account is being called into question because it has no deltas and the watkins lies and board fuckery. And i agree having read all the drops this doesn't have the same voice at all. It's clonky. I
could be wrong.
And I don´t think this helps us in any way. We already know what to do when truth comes to light. Spread it, meme the shit out of opposition. We don´t need to know what Q team is going to do exactly, why and what to focus on at this point. Hive mind can catch any significant message at this point I believe.
I have been here since the election. With all the weirdness of the posting and oddities surrounding the return. I am skeptical. I don't doubt the old Q stuff at all, but I think its a good thing to be skeptical when things seem off. When proof's roll in, it feels much better to be able to debunk criticisms with logic, rather than emotion.
I want these to be real but I also don't want to be blindly trust things. So unfortunately I do have a "old Q" and "new Q" category until my mind can decide what is what.
Right, when people call it a cult, I laugh because most conversation's here involve deciphering information and articles and trying to piece together a bigger picture of event's. Even if Q didn't exist I still like this kind of research and find it very eye opening what can be deciphered when looking at things on a larger scale.
When you blindly trust, then what are people suppose to think when someone calls you a cult member and your response is also cult like? That's not really how you change peoples minds.
Kind of wish this phrase would disappear. “Trust but verify” isn’t a thing.
The definition of trust is not having to verify things all the time. If you’re verifying constantly, you don’t trust it. By definition.
When was the last time you had someone taste-test a meal for poison when it was provided by your spouse?
When was the last time you asked your boss to verify their identity so that you knew you weren’t working for a fraud?
When was the last time you cautiously approached the old family dog that has never bitten anyone in his life?
Are you not verifying the things you trust in your life?
The only phrase that makes sense is “verify, then trust.” THAT is how you avoid ending up in a cult mindset. Once you start trusting people promoting the thing you’re studying, you’re already losing your ability to research it properly.
I get what your saying. I think we will find out in time. I have no problem being patient and having things proven as it comes. After all many Q posts are also not brought to light til years later!.
As far as what a Fake Q's motives would be, that is up in the air.
But in my mind lets say I hypothetically had access to Q's account and I wanted to play games on it.
My first goal would be to establish trust. Even if I believed Hutchinson's story I absolutely would pretend not. Any real agenda or change of direction would need to happen slowly and subtlety to avoid people catching on. If your a bad actor and your any good at it, I feel like you would put in the work to establish trust.
Not saying that's what is happening. But motives is something that very hard to really know and so I can't go off of that as a reason to trust alone. Maybe as a overall trend or on a checklist but undeniable proofs are unfortunately the only real way to verify 100%.
au contraire.
Reads very Q-ish. Note: this is a post by the tripcoded Q account, not non-tripcode supposedly "delta" "Q" posts being bandied about.
The tripcoded q account is being called into question because it has no deltas and the watkins lies and board fuckery. And i agree having read all the drops this doesn't have the same voice at all. It's clonky. I could be wrong.
I agree with you.
And I don´t think this helps us in any way. We already know what to do when truth comes to light. Spread it, meme the shit out of opposition. We don´t need to know what Q team is going to do exactly, why and what to focus on at this point. Hive mind can catch any significant message at this point I believe.
Sounds like the Original Q before the bots made them start typing in broken sentences with tons of symbols to throw off text reading.
Yeah. With all the questions and long absence..need a rock solid newTrump/Q+ proof.
Anon delta from 8 Chan ;
https://ibb.co/L8JKYht
Accurate??
Could be but then these posts have the problem of no trip code.
The trip code posts have the no deltas problem plus odd rhythm and cadence in the speech.
I'm just going to wait and see how it plays out.
Casting doubt on Q is clearly the new shill tactic.
I have been here since the election. With all the weirdness of the posting and oddities surrounding the return. I am skeptical. I don't doubt the old Q stuff at all, but I think its a good thing to be skeptical when things seem off. When proof's roll in, it feels much better to be able to debunk criticisms with logic, rather than emotion.
I want these to be real but I also don't want to be blindly trust things. So unfortunately I do have a "old Q" and "new Q" category until my mind can decide what is what.
Right, when people call it a cult, I laugh because most conversation's here involve deciphering information and articles and trying to piece together a bigger picture of event's. Even if Q didn't exist I still like this kind of research and find it very eye opening what can be deciphered when looking at things on a larger scale.
When you blindly trust, then what are people suppose to think when someone calls you a cult member and your response is also cult like? That's not really how you change peoples minds.
Kind of wish this phrase would disappear. “Trust but verify” isn’t a thing.
The definition of trust is not having to verify things all the time. If you’re verifying constantly, you don’t trust it. By definition.
When was the last time you had someone taste-test a meal for poison when it was provided by your spouse?
When was the last time you asked your boss to verify their identity so that you knew you weren’t working for a fraud?
When was the last time you cautiously approached the old family dog that has never bitten anyone in his life?
Are you not verifying the things you trust in your life?
The only phrase that makes sense is “verify, then trust.” THAT is how you avoid ending up in a cult mindset. Once you start trusting people promoting the thing you’re studying, you’re already losing your ability to research it properly.
Clearly, there is a question about authenticity.
The good news is this: we are questioning this after only 4 of these drops. So, we ARE using critical thinking, as a group.
Proceed with caution is a good position, unless and until solid confirmation comes in.
However, we can still analyze the drops from both Real and LARP perspectives.
Was Hutchinson's story believable?
No.
So, why would LARP/psyop want to push the idea that she was a plant?
What would be the benefit?
Clearly, it would be something Real Q would want to reveal, but Fake Q?
I get what your saying. I think we will find out in time. I have no problem being patient and having things proven as it comes. After all many Q posts are also not brought to light til years later!.
As far as what a Fake Q's motives would be, that is up in the air.
But in my mind lets say I hypothetically had access to Q's account and I wanted to play games on it.
My first goal would be to establish trust. Even if I believed Hutchinson's story I absolutely would pretend not. Any real agenda or change of direction would need to happen slowly and subtlety to avoid people catching on. If your a bad actor and your any good at it, I feel like you would put in the work to establish trust.
Not saying that's what is happening. But motives is something that very hard to really know and so I can't go off of that as a reason to trust alone. Maybe as a overall trend or on a checklist but undeniable proofs are unfortunately the only real way to verify 100%.
In a previous era Q used the term: critical thinking. Now he added the pronoun: YOUR to it.
This makes it much more direct.