A really good point well taken, pg.
It’s a given that Q warned about who was whom, regarding anyone’s [*presumptions*] who wears the black or white hat. I think it will become clearer.
Theoretically, there are individuals considered to be sketchy at best, or loons at worst that turn out to be bang-on with Truth.
See Dan Crenshaw and Dr. Shiva. Sketchy?
See *Johnheretohelp and *Simon Parkes. Loons?
Regardless, does it have to mean these being deemed “loons” are so wholly one dimensional (in the traditional sense of the word) they must be destroyed, or can Never Ever be in proximity to the bang-on Truth?
Getting the nose out of joint over source(s) other than our own is a peeve. is proving to step on possibilities and hive minds and suppresses.
We’ve lost a few over it in fact, along the way. It’s a good thing to re-examine.
Besides, we accept or reject sources as we please, anyway. 😁
It’s a given that Q warned about who was whom, regarding anyone’s [*presumptions*] who wears the black or white hat. I think it will become clearer.
Theoretically, there are individuals considered to be sketchy at best, or loons at worst that turn out to be bang-on with Truth.
See Dan Crenshaw and Dr. Shiva. Sketchy?
There were warnings about Dan Crenshaw from good people but I wasn't up on the source info and left the question about him unanswered (didn't research him) since I normally don't see him.
In hindsight, I wish I kept a list when good people point out paytriots or other embeds. With a cast of thousands, it's hard to keep track.
I think it's especially tough when the moles 'blink on' (act patriotic for a long time) and then suddenly 'blink off' (attempt to undermine the audit, Trump's 2020 win, Trump) etc. Those investments in acting like a patriot are really quite convincing.
See *Johnheretohelp and *Simon Parkes. Loons?
The former is backed by Lin Wood/General McInerney.
The latter espouses sex with aliens and alien love child - a problem for our Board Owner and our thread's existance.
Regardless, does it have to mean these being deemed “loons” are so wholly one dimensional (in the traditional sense of the word) they must be destroyed, or can Never Ever be in proximity to the bang-on Truth?
No. I sometimes read content from known black hats because I want to see what they are saying (e.g., DU) But I don't post them to FR, especially if they will cause problems re the board rules and the Q thread's disputed right to exist on FR.
Getting the nose out of joint over source(s) other than our own is a peeve. is proving to step on possibilities and hive minds and suppresses.
FWIW, as you no doubt have a variety of examples in mind, I don't consider working to comply with board owner rules and try to cultivate thread survival (e.g., Simon Parkes) equivalent to getting a 'nose out of joint.'
We’ve lost a few over it in fact, along the way.
I think we naturally lose a few, actually more than a few, as people make personal decisions about what they want in a posting environment.
I can say that I've gotten pm's from some saying they will leave if I do NOT make a certain action, at the same time others are pm'ing me they will leave the thread if I take that action. How can hundreds of very different people collaborate on one thread without some deciding there's a better fit for them elsewhere?
The ones who told me I was personally responsible for the destruction of the Q thread, and damaging the Q movement, based on my weakness and cowardly refusal to 'crack down' on Q thread participants, found places that they felt were more competently organized. Seems like win-win.
I do make mistakes that cost us participants. However, I can't conceive of someone in this role not making mistakes over the course of years. We'll never know what might have been.
It’s a good thing to re-examine.
Yes. New information is always forthcoming. I know Jim Rob abhors Alex Jones, but when AJ was censored, JR re-examined and decided FR can post him because there is a priority to keep free speech.
I think some may be surprised at home much thought I continue to give such issues. THere ain't no cook book for me to follow.
I recall with chagrin laughing at those who told me the Q movement would take years to 'win' the battle. I was certain it would only be around another 6 months to The Storm...*pulls bag over head*
*lifts corner of bag* I sometimes wonder how long this would have taken if RR and Mueller had not installed the blocade...then maybe no time for Covid and multiple impeachments.
*lowers corner of bag*
*sigh*
Besides, we accept or reject sources as we please, anyway. 😁
True. As long as Jim Rob doesn't have prior policy against what we post, or maybe a history of locking a Q thread for having posted the content previously, we can even share it on thread here.
I sometimes read content and sources that would suprise people. I want to know what the black hats and shills want us to believe.
But no one gets between our personal decisions on whom to follow. Good post, Rita.
For example, I like this performance and it shocked someone into pm'ing "You sometimes surprise me".
I think she's livin' her best life (sound icon in upper right of vid window).