As the person which at some moment was supposing it might be reliable I could say: it is hard lesson,but necessary lesson.Good job.
Some conclusions:
- Have we WORKING base of proofs ? Come on u/Evspra: https://bookofqproofs.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/book-of-q-proofs-v1-3.pdf This one thing is not even working. Luckily nobody looks for that right ? /s
(Hosting for such base is another problem,probably we shall go P2P)
2.We have no database or no thread for "facts" and its verification. Not enough verification.No coordination. Just posts on forum we will loose in noise of comments ?
3.Some guys are researching space force material still do something,but because of cleaning cookies regularly i lost crypto key to their room (can log,but only present communication available). Only few people including me were interested,but I had another plan too (now cancelled due to GA.win being invigilated by the press).
What does it show: do we know who is doing research ? Do we appreciate good research ? Do we know we do enough research or do we know if some research was already done and by who ?
** Ok,we ARE lazy ones. Too lazy it seems. After news will notice - and will notice, those George News incident will be used against us - have no doubts. Of course if "the news" would be asked about their "journalism" and methodology - they are not better really. But they will not mention that... They will mention our and only our failure.Question of time.Question of time...
Also: It seems that GeorgeNews was carefully planted. There were users who fucked research about the key or maybe (memory is sometimes flawful) even claimed that "they found nothing on ebay". Claiming localization and so on. Can we track who started those things about GeorgeNews ? No,no database.
No,no real formal list of argument for or against.
New Problems.This thing would cause another problems.
In short: too much trust about questioning everything. While it was indeed advised by Q,treated literally it could be very destructive too.
Some people are angry because they were "only asking questions" and were banned.
The problem is some questions are and will be targetting Q posts and Q to "prove" Q is larp with the target to "dismantle Qanon" (there is no "qanon" but those lie they invented is about targetting us,so I used those their label). While we need research Q as not-artificial meta-meme have no strong defence mechanisms like "ideologies" (other meta-memes) have. For me it proves our "ideology" (too big word for believing Q posts but let's treat that this way) is probably NOT artificial and NOT engineered really (or if would be - then engineered poorly) but it also means those lack of stability which could be used.
While I am just reasonable sceptic who hopes about military action because knows that problems signalled by Q are real, person seeing things that may indicate that indeed there is Q military operation (or perfect show for us - we can never be sure), I could try to unmask some of those things,but I cannot do this all alone. We all should be careful. We need researches done formalised way with sourcing who puts what argument/counterargument, we need it searchable enough or we will have serious trouble.
We all need to check sources
We all need to check what those data means
We all need to be cautious and ask - how those data could affect our behaviour,and would that be good or bad ?
We all need something like "meme warfare center" but not being only about memes but about all propaganda,all media. By the way - some intelligence man and writer from France with Russian ancestors whose daughter served in US diplomacy suggested this idea before memes in internet emerged. I cannot say more about him today,because of his importance,but he advised it when internet was like baby.
As the person which at some moment was supposing it might be reliable I could say: it is hard lesson,but necessary lesson.Good job.
Some conclusions:
- Have we WORKING base of proofs ? Come on u/Evspra: https://bookofqproofs.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/book-of-q-proofs-v1-3.pdf This one thing is not even working. Luckily nobody looks for that right ? /s
(Hosting for such base is another problem,probably we shall go P2P)
2.We have no database or no thread for "facts" and its verification. Not enough verification.No coordination. Just posts on forum we will loose in noise of comments ?
3.Some guys are researching space force material still do something,but because of cleaning cookies regularly i lost crypto key to their room (can log,but only present communication available). Only few people including me were interested,but I had another plan too (now cancelled due to GA.win being invigilated by the press).
What does it show: do we know who is doing research ? Do we appreciate good research ? Do we know we do enough research or do we know if some research was already done and by who ?
** Ok,we ARE lazy ones. Too lazy it seems. After news will notice - and will notice, those George News incident will be used against us - have no doubts. Of course if "the news" would be asked about their "journalism" and methodology - they are not better really. But they will not mention that... They will mention our and only our failure.Question of time.Question of time...
Also: It seems that GeorgeNews was carefully planted. There were users who fucked research about the key or maybe (memory is sometimes flawful) even claimed that "they found nothing on ebay". Claiming localization and so on. Can we track who started those things about GeorgeNews ? No,no database.
No,no real formal list of argument for or against.
New Problems.This thing would cause another problems.
In short: too much trust about questioning everything. While it was indeed advised by Q,treated literally it could be very destructive too.
Some people are angry because they were "only asking questions" and were banned.
The problem is some questions are and will be targetting Q posts and Q to "prove" Q is larp with the target to "dismantle Qanon" (there is no "qanon" but those lie they invented is about targetting us,so I used those their label). While we need research Q as not-artificial meta-meme have no strong defence mechanisms like "ideologies" (other meta-memes) have. For me it proves our "ideology" (too big word for believing Q posts but let's treat that this way) is probably NOT artificial and NOT engineered really (or if would be - then engineered poorly) but it also means those lack of stability which could be used.
While I am just reasonable sceptic who hopes about military action because knows that problems signalled by Q are real, person seeing things that may indicate that indeed there is Q military operation (or perfect show for us - we can never be sure), I could try to unmask some of those things,but I cannot do this all alone. We all should be careful. We need researches done formalised way with sourcing who puts what argument/counterargument, we need it searchable enough or we will have serious trouble.
We all need to check sources
We all need to check what those data means
We all need to be cautious and ask - how those data could affect our behaviour,and would that be good or bad ?
We all need something like "meme warfare center" but not being only about memes but about all propaganda,all media. By the way - some intelligence man and writer from France with Russian ancestors whose daughter served in US diplomacy suggested this idea before memes in internet emerged. I cannot say more about him today.
As the person which at some moment was supposing it might be reliable I could say: it is hard lesson,but necessary lesson.Good job.
Some conclusions:
- Have we WORKING base of proofs ? Come on u/Evspra: https://bookofqproofs.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/book-of-q-proofs-v1-3.pdf This one thing is not even working. Luckily nobody looks for that right ? /s
(Hosting for such base is another problem,probably we shall go P2P)
2.We have no database or no thread for "facts" and its verification. Not enough verification.No coordination. Just posts on forum we will loose in noise of comments ?
3.Some guys are researching space force material still do something,but because of cleaning cookies regularly i lost crypto key to their room (can log,but only present communication available). Only few people including me were interested,but I had another plan too (now cancelled due to GA.win being invigilated by the press).
What does it show: do we know who is doing research ? Do we appreciate good research ? Do we know we do enough research or do we know if some research was already done and by who ?
** Ok,we ARE lazy ones. Too lazy it seems. After news will notice - and will notice, those George News incident will be used against us - have no doubts. Of course if "the news" would be asked about their "journalism" and methodology - they are not better really. But they will not mention that... They will mention our and only our failure.Question of time.Question of time...
Also: It seems that GeorgeNews was carefully planted. There were users who fucked research about the key or maybe (memory is sometimes flawful) even claimed that "they found nothing on ebay". Claiming localization and so on. Can we track who started those things about GeorgeNews ? No,no database.
No,no real formal list of argument for or against.
New Problems.This thing would cause another problems.
In short: too much trust about questioning everything. While it was indeed advised by Q,treated literally it could be very destructive too.
Some people are angry because they were "only asking questions" and were banned.
The problem is some questions are and will be targetting Q posts and Q to "prove" Q is larp with the target to "dismantle Qanon" (there is no "qanon" but those lie they invented is about targetting us,so I used those their label). While we need research Q as not-artificial meta-meme have no strong defence mechanisms like "ideologies" (other meta-memes) have. For me it proves our "ideology" (too big word for believing Q posts but let's treat that this way) is probably NOT artificial and NOT engineered really (or if would be - then engineered poorly) but it also means those lack of stability which could be used.
While I am just reasonable sceptic who hopes about military action because knows that problems signalled by Q are real, person seeing things that may indicate that indeed there is Q military operation (or perfect show for us - we can never be sure), I could try to unmask some of those things,but I cannot do this all alone. We all should be careful. We need researches done formalised way with sourcing who puts what argument/counterargument, we need it searchable enough or we will have serious trouble.
We all need to check sources
We all need to check what those data means
We all need to be cautious and ask - how those data could affect our behaviour,and would that be good or bad ?
We all need something like "meme warfare center" but not being only about memes but about all propaganda,all media. By the way - some intelligence man and writer from France with Russian ancestors whose daughter served in US diplomacy suggested this idea before memes in internet emerged.
As the person which at some moment was supposing it might be reliable I could say: it is hard lesson,but necessary lesson.Good job.
Some conclusions:
- Have we WORKING base of proofs ? Come on u/Evspra: https://bookofqproofs.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/book-of-q-proofs-v1-3.pdf This one thing is not even working. Luckily nobody looks for that right ? /s
(Hosting for such base is another problem,probably we shall go P2P)
2.We have no database or no thread for "facts" and its verification. Not enough verification.No coordination. Just posts on forum we will loose in noise of comments ?
3.Some guys are researching space force material still do something,but because of cleaning cookies regularly i lost crypto key to their room (can log,but only present communication available). Only few people including me were interested,but I had another plan too (now cancelled due to GA.win being invigilated by the press).
What does it show: do we know who is doing research ? Do we appreciate good research ? Do we know we do enough research or do we know if some research was already done and by who ?
** Ok,we ARE lazy ones. Too lazy it seems. After news will notice - and will notice, those George News incident will be used against us - have no doubts. Of course if "the news" would be asked about their "journalism" and methodology - they are not better really. But they will not mention that... They will mention our and only our failure.Question of time.Question of time...
Also: It seems that GeorgeNews was carefully planted. There were users who fucked research about the key or maybe (memory is sometimes flawful) even claimed that "they found nothing on ebay". Claiming localization and so on. Can we track who started those things about GeorgeNews ? No,no database.
No,no real formal list of argument for or against.
New Problems.This thing would cause another problems.
In short: too much trust about questioning everything. While it was indeed advised by Q,treated literally it could be very destructive too.
Some people are angry because they were "only asking questions" and were banned.
The problem is some questions are and will be targetting Q posts and Q to "prove" Q is larp with the target to "dismantle Qanon" (there is no "qanon" but those lie they invented is about targetting us,so I used those their label). While we need research Q as not-artificial meta-meme have no strong defence mechanisms like "ideologies" (other meta-memes) have. For me it proves our "ideology" (too big word for believing Q posts but let's treat that this way) is probably NOT artificial and NOT engineered really (or if would be - then engineered poorly) but it also means those lack of stability which could be used.
While I am just reasonable sceptic who hopes about military action because knows that problems signalled by Q are real, person seeing things that may indicate that indeed there is Q military operation (or perfect show for us - we can never be sure), I could try to unmask some of those things,but I cannot do this all alone. We all should be careful. We need researches done formalised way with sourcing who puts what argument/counterargument, we need it searchable enough or we will have serious trouble.
We all need to check sources
We all need to check what those data means
We all need to be cautious and ask - how those data could affect our behaviour,and would that be good or bad ?
We all need something like "meme warfare center" but not being only about memes. By the way - some intelligence man from France suggested this idea much,much before memes.
As the person which at some moment was supposing it might be reliable I could say: it is hard lesson,but necessary lesson.Good job.
Some conclusions:
- Have we WORKING base of proofs ? Come on u/Evspra: https://bookofqproofs.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/book-of-q-proofs-v1-3.pdf This one thing is not even working. Luckily nobody looks for that right ? /s
(Hosting for such base is another problem,probably we shall go P2P)
2.We have no database or no thread for "facts" and its verification. Not enough verification.No coordination. Just posts on forum we will loose in noise of comments ?
3.Some guys are researching space force material still do something,but because of cleaning cookies regularly i lost crypto key to their room (can log,but only present communication available). Only few people including me were interested,but I had another plan too (now cancelled due to GA.win being invigilated by the press).
What does it show: do we know who is doing research ? Do we appreciate good research ? Do we know we do enough research or do we know if some research was already done and by who ?
** Ok,we ARE lazy ones. Too lazy it seems. After news will notice - and will notice, those George News incident will be used against us - have no doubts. Of course if "the news" would be asked about their "journalism" and methodology - they are not better really. But they will not mention that... They will mention our and only our failure.Question of time.Question of time...
Also: It seems that GeorgeNews was carefully planted. There were users who fucked research about the key or maybe (memory is sometimes flawful) even claimed that "they found nothing on ebay". Claiming localization and so on. Can we track who started those things about GeorgeNews ? No,no database.
No,no real formal list of argument for or against.
New Problems.This thing would cause another problems.
In short: too much trust about questioning everything. While it was indeed advised by Q,treated literally it could be very destructive too.
Some people are angry because they were "only asking questions" and were banned.
The problem is some questions are and will be targetting Q posts and Q to "prove" Q is larp with the target to "dismantle Qanon" (there is no "qanon" but those lie they invented is about targetting us,so I used those their label). While we need research Q as not-artificial meta-meme have no strong defence mechanisms like "ideologies" (other meta-memes) have. For me it proves our "ideology" (too big word for believing Q posts but let's treat that this way) is probably NOT artificial and NOT engineered really (or if would be - then engineered poorly) but it also means those lack of stability which could be used.
While I am just reasonable sceptic who hopes about military action because knows that problems signalled by Q are real, person seeing things that may indicate that indeed there is Q military operation (or perfect show for us - we can never be sure), I could try to unmask some of those things,but I cannot do this all alone. We need researches done formalised way with sourcing who puts what argument/counterargument, we need it searchable enough or we will have serious trouble.
As the person which at some moment was supposing it might be reliable I could say: it is hard lesson,but necessary lesson.Good job.
Some conclusions:
- Have we WORKING base of proofs ? Come on u/Evspra: https://bookofqproofs.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/book-of-q-proofs-v1-3.pdf This one thing is not even working. Luckily nobody looks for that right ? /s
(Hosting for such base is another problem,probably we shall go P2P)
2.We have no database or no thread for "facts" and its verification. Not enough verification.No coordination. Just posts on forum we will loose in noise of comments ?
3.Some guys are researching space force material still do something,but because of cleaning cookies regularly i lost crypto key to their room (can log,but only present communication available). Only few people including me were interested,but I had another plan too (now cancelled due to GA.win being invigilated by the press).
What does it show: do we know who is doing research ? Do we appreciate good research ? Do we know we do enough research or do we know if some research was already done and by who ?
** Ok,we ARE lazy ones. Too lazy it seems. After news will notice - and will notice, those George News incident will be used against us - have no doubts. Of course if "the news" would be asked about their "journalism" and methodology - they are not better really. But they will not mention that... They will mention our and only our failure.Question of time.Question of time...
Also: It seems that GeorgeNews was carefully planted. There were users who fucked research about the key or maybe (memory is sometimes flawful) even claimed that "they found nothing on ebay". Claiming localization and so on. Can we track who started those things about GeorgeNews ? No,no database.
No,no real formal list of argument for or against.
New Problems.This thing would cause another problems.
In short: too much trust about questioning everything. While it was indeed advised by Q,treated literally it could be very destructive too.
Some people are angry because they were "only asking questions" and were banned.
The problem is some questions are and will be targetting Q posts and Q to "prove" Q is larp with the target to "dismantle Qanon". While we need research Q as not-artificial meta-meme have no strong defence mechanisms like "ideologies" (other meta-memes) have. For me it proves our "ideology" (too big word for believing Q posts but let's treat that this way) is probably NOT artificial and NOT engineered really (or if would be - then engineered poorly) but it also means those lack of stability.
While I am just reasonable sceptic who hopes about military action because knows that problems signaled by Q are real, person seeing things that may indicate that indeed there is Q military operation (or perfect show for us - we can never be sure), I could try to unmask some of those things,but I cannot do this all alone.