The whole "there is no Qanon there is Q and anons" still makes zero sense to me. Q is anonymous. He is an anon who calls himself Q. I am an anon who calls myself HelloDolly. Not sure why this whole "there is no such thing as Qanon" is perceived as such a "gotcha." In the scheme of things to me it is the least important thing in the wide world. PS: Isn't Qanon.pub a website set up way back when, by someone who was decidedly NOT MSM?
The reason it makes sense to me is because Q talks about it in his posts. He points out that he was only ever known as "Q", and the reason the media calls it "QAnon" is so that they can include "anons" as part of "Q" so that they can have a fake anon go and shoot up a pizza parlor so that the whole thing can be made all about him instead of the content of what Q actually had to say. It just makes it easier for the media to insert actors and use that mechanism to discredit the entire movement into a bunch of wacky conspiracy theories.
they can have a fake anon go and shoot up a pizza parlor so that the whole thing can be made all about him instead of the content of what Q actually had to say
I'm confused...does "anon" just mean "people" in this context?
Isn't this all sort of a "no true scotsman" fallacy
I caught Patriots on Twitter saying QAnon. And I reminded them that QAnon was something made up by the Fake Lame Stream Media.
I get that people realize it's not technically correct, but the term does cover "Q + Anons". Not sure why there is so much distaste on it.
The whole "there is no Qanon there is Q and anons" still makes zero sense to me. Q is anonymous. He is an anon who calls himself Q. I am an anon who calls myself HelloDolly. Not sure why this whole "there is no such thing as Qanon" is perceived as such a "gotcha." In the scheme of things to me it is the least important thing in the wide world. PS: Isn't Qanon.pub a website set up way back when, by someone who was decidedly NOT MSM?
The reason it makes sense to me is because Q talks about it in his posts. He points out that he was only ever known as "Q", and the reason the media calls it "QAnon" is so that they can include "anons" as part of "Q" so that they can have a fake anon go and shoot up a pizza parlor so that the whole thing can be made all about him instead of the content of what Q actually had to say. It just makes it easier for the media to insert actors and use that mechanism to discredit the entire movement into a bunch of wacky conspiracy theories.
I'm confused...does "anon" just mean "people" in this context?
Isn't this all sort of a "no true scotsman" fallacy