Let me explain why feathers get ruffled.

People have a lifetime of well-informed opinions, the older one gets the better their discernment becomes.

When someone asks you to reserve judgement and just listen to what someone has to say, what they're really asking for is to remove all discernment.

Like this ...

IF You The Listener take the time to LISTEN, and Carefully Process What is said and What is not said, but Implied

You're asking me to set aside what I already know. What do I already know?

• Rumors of Juan being complete bullshit.
• Q having told us that anons are the news.
• Juan is not anon
• Every other "Qanon influencer" that has tried to build a name for themselves in the Q community have panned out to be complete bullshit grifters
• Using a fake name that equals 17 is cringe. But I guess "I am Q" is a little too pretentious?

You want me to set aside a lifetime of well-informed opinion to see whether Juan is legit or not? Why? Why should I set aside the above red flags?

If Juan has information that is so vital, he can make it past my filters. Except there's the problem.

He has no information that can be verified. Everything is unverifiable, by design.

I've listened to Juan. He'll make some statement of fact that is completely unverifiable. An example: papers have been drawn so they can arrest Trump any time they want.

Sauce? Nope. Because he's Juan TrustmebrO'Savin. Not only will he refuse to provide sauce, he's not even going to infer how he would know such a thing. "I have confidential sources who told me" ... nope. Won't even say that.

Juan TrustmebrO'Savin. Because everything he says is maximum "trust me bro".

Q followers value anonymity and information that can be sourced.

Some dude who needs to make a name for himself and provide statements of fact that are not sourced are the complete antithesis of the Q movement.

And now I've come to understand, through you, that there's two Juans? You've only added to the red flags.

Why don't you try extrapolating something Juan says that you think is important, research it to verify it is correct, provide the sauce to it and then just post the information?

Because you can't.

Let me explain why feathers get ruffled.

People have a lifetime of well-informed opinions, the older one gets the better their discernment becomes.

When someone asks you to reserve judgement and just listen to what someone has to say, what they're really asking for is to remove all discernment.

Like this ...

IF You The Listener take the time to LISTEN, and Carefully Process What is said and What is not said, but Implied

You're asking me to set aside what I already know. What do I already know?

• Rumors of Juan being complete bullshit.
• Q having told us that anons are the news.
• Juan is not anon
• Every other "Qanon influencer" that has tried to build a name for themselves in the Q community have panned out to be complete bullshit grifters
• Using a fake name that equals 17 is cringe. But I guess "I am Q" is a little too pretentious?

You want me to set aside a lifetime of well-informed opinion to see whether Juan is legit or not? Why? Why should I set aside the above red flags?

If Juan has information that is so vital, he can make it past my filters. Except there's the problem.

He has no information that can be verified. Everything is unverifiable, by design.

I've listened to Juan. He'll make some statement of fact that is completely unverifiable. An example: papers have been drawn so they can arrest Trump any time they want.

Sauce? Nope. Because he's Juan TrustmebrO'Savin. Not only is he going to provide sauce, he's not even going to infer how he would know such a thing. "I have confidential sources who told me" ... nope. Won't even say that.

Juan TrustmebrO'Savin. Because everything he says is maximum "trust me bro".

Q followers value anonymity and information that can be sourced.

Some dude who needs to make a name for himself and provide statements of fact that are not sourced are the complete antithesis of the Q movement.

And now I've come to understand, through you, that there's two Juans? You've only added to the red flags.

Why don't you try extrapolating something Juan says that you think is important, research it to verify it is correct, provide the sauce to it and then just post the information?

Because you can't.