Few minutes ago, one of our analytical contributors deleted his account. Don't know what happened, but hope he will remember: he, his insights into frequencies and symbols, were a true gift to this community.
Until we meet again!
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (100)
sorted by:
The moderation team only removes low effort dooming or shilling posts / comments. We see a lot of that when the happenings start firing off.
Check our sidebar. The rules are very clear.
We do not tolerate Anons who spread fear, doubt, uncertainty, and doom with regards to the mission of The Great Awakening. Nothing Can Stop What Is Coming. We don't consider this to be just a catch phrase. These are words to live by.
Sometimes the best thing for Anons to do is to take a step back from GAW for awhile and take a walk in nature. Come back revitalized, and rejuvenated and ready to keep fighting the good fight. We don't get to decide the timetable of The Great Awakening. Humanity must be given the opportunity to awaken. The choice to awaken matters greatly.
As for GAW, this is the public face of Q and The Great Awakening. We hold our community to high standards, and expect the best of the best from our Anons.
Question: when a person deletes their account, why are their comments and post history erased? Couldn't they be retained?
Sometimes I search old threads, and it's a real shame that comments and posts are just gone.
Unfortunately, the Wins are set up so that when a user deletes their account, their entire history goes with them. It is unfortunate that 369Q chose the path they did, but what is done is done. There is no way to go back and preserve the posts and comments, unless someone already archived them.
I would greatly encourage any Anons considering this action to take a week or two away from The Great Awakening in order to recharge and rejuvenate themselves. Nuking your account isn't worth it.
That's a bummer about the archiving. Good to know, thanks.
You can choose to purge content when you delete an account
Differing opinions are always welcomed on The Great Awakening. What matters is the manner in which those opinion are presented to the community. Present your theories, and ideas with high quality analysis and citations from Q posts and I guarantee you will not have any such posts or comments removed.
As ever, low effort posts serving no other purpose than to discourage the members of our movement will be removed without hesitation.
Soooo….what your saying is a differing opinions are welcome as long as they follow your rules…🤔
Different opinions are very much needed. I see them as inevitable to expand my own thinking.
Examples? Let's look at our regular sources. In ca each 5th of Brian Cates' post (I have TG only), he opens aspects I'd never think of on my own. Even if his “prescription” does not materialize yet, those are prospects of thinking, worth following with other topics. He can be stubborn, he can be wrong, but he's always observant and clear and seasons everything with a hearty dose of humor.
Or take uncle Clif: that fucker knows incredible shit (his signature words, not mine 🤣), connects dots through history with the help of analysis of language, teaches what to notice etc. Yes, you need breaking in to listen to him, no matter how awakened you are; any normie will discard his average lecture as a total woo (pun intended) in a minute. (Fortunately, the very first video I saw was about street resistance tactics during a peaceful demonstration, so I listened again and looked for more.) Even here I see people who nag him about $600 silver etc.
On the other hand, some ops bring “different opinions” from Godlewski or Charlie Ward or RealRawNews. Yes, I, too, went through Ward period. All those grifters have their function: to teach everyone how to spot red flags or how to use source critics. Until you waste your time trying to sift out the grain of truth from them, you probably are not a critical thinker, yet. A pity we have them brought up because they are, like, say, potty training or bicycle lessons: required while growing up, total waste of time with normal adults. And I expect we are adults here.
I agree. Listen to everybody, take what resonates and leave the rest. Some of my greatest insights came from people that I do not fully agree with.
As Q said "expand your thinking"
Also, dooming is not "a different opinion", is it?
Are you conflating the two?
It appears that you are, either consciously or unconsciously, attempting to hijack and undermine the purpose of the board, by directly attacking and accusing the mod team, because THEIR opinion and view does not agree with yours....
This is what Marxism does. Marxism believes it is justified in usurping any purpose of anything it doesn't agree with, because it sees itself as the ultimate right, the ultimate authority.... "Marxism is "right" therefore, we don't "undermine" things; we improve them".
"silencing anybody that does not follow your narrative."
What an accusation to make. Are you upholding the purpose of the board, or are you attempting to alter the purpose to suit your views, your opinion, and your desire?
Hi, fren. You're one who would be missed just as badly under similar circumstances.
“Dooming” depends on definition. “Elon bad because xyz” or “Trump has always mingled with swamp creatures” etc can be just a different opinion, but to me, it's shills and dooming.
Do I want to silence that thing? Maybe not silence, but en masse those opinionists are annoying, distracting and trying to create a non-productive bandwagon. Do they offer any positive program, new ideas? Nope? So, they are shills and doomers.
Thanks you, Mrs.
<start script>
My view: I think there are gray areas. I would hope, and encourage, those who bring a contrasting view, for example regarding Musk, to express it, backing that up with reasoning, facts, and disclosure about personal bias. Within the framework of the purpose of the board, I think the mods certainly embrace and encourage diversity of approach. In fact, its critical.
But in a spectrum of opinions and views, there may also be expression of non-constructive, unhelpful views ala dooming, etc., and that can get mixed in. Which is why mods have the task of filtering out and separating wheat from chaff, to the best of their ability, on the basis of a few things, I suspect:
motivation: what is the poster/commenter seeking or trying to achieve?
net effect: does the comment, discussion, approach bring a net positive effect, or does it have a net negative effect on the purpose of the board?
The linchpin to everything is the purpose. Purpose is the reason for the existence.
In addition, as you allude to, yes, the mods (and the community as a collective, too) need to consider whether collectively, different accounts are seeking to undermine together, or whether they are simply misguided, etc. In the case of misguided, it's tough, because the mods need to balance benefit of the whole board with the need for the misguided individual(s) to have opportunity for growth (i.e. to remove, or not remove).
Ultimately, engagement with the board should be see as a fusion of TWO reciprocal purposes:
One, contribution to the board, the collective foundation of knowledge, reasoning, effort.
Two, an opportunity for personal growth, support, networking, and development.
Any genuine creation always has dual purposes fusing the whole (i.e. one) and the individual (i.e. two). Harmony between these two purposes is the bedrock of creative purpose.
If someone has a serious issue with the mods and how the board is being run, it may be an opportunity for reflection and self-growth by looking internally. Which is not to say this is always the case. Reasonable criticism of the mod team in the context of the board purpose is likely to be a constructive good thing, but IMO, should be coupled with a recognition of the work and value that the mods bring to the community.
<end pontification script>