Here if anyone has questions, but also wanted to mention this.

This is why the title formatting matters. The wrong format of putting the : in the wrong place will crew with scrapper sites like wearethene.ws ; it didn't catch the breads with the wrong formatting, and only caught the last one and next one because of the correctly formatted bread.

I just copy and paste the last bread's title (assuming it's correct) then change the title and number but nothing else.

This example happened today so i thought I'd post about it just to show how incorrect title formats screw with scrapper sites.

>>9329

> how d'ya deal with anon complaints?

If it's the person who ALWAYS complains, which you might see anons and bakers call "rainman" or "megashill", just ignore it. Another anon that some call "newsfag" posts a ton of articles sometimes 20 or more than complains when all of the posts aren't added. Maybe check if some are note worthy but if not just carry on.

But for legitimate complaints, hear the anon out and discuss it if possible to come to some understanding. Anons like when a baker will be transparent and discuss what ever they're talking about.

>what if something is notabled but you think it's shills doing it not anons?

Don't add it and say why. I've done that. Someone (either an anon who doesn't know or an actual shill) notables something that either an anon or shill posted and it seems to you it's a shill post, just don't add it.

>>9334

No I just noticed it. It's been fixed since I noticed it though. Just thought it'd be a good idea to mention it tonight.

>>9331

It's where the colon is, it should be after the number

Q Research General #11089: The Truth Will Set Them Free. Patriots On Point Edition

*Q Research General: #11088 Operation True Colors, Karma WILL Repay (You) Edition

*Q Research General: #11087 Notables Doublin Edition

*Q Research General: #11086 OANN Can't Stay Edition

*Q Research General: #11085 The WHOLE World is Watching Edition

Q Research General #11084: No More Kiss the Ring For You Edition

>>9338

No problem. As for notables you kinda get a good handle on what to add and what not to. Relevant news, Trump tweets, digs, side by sides, graphics, and other things. I personally try to stay away from sauceless tweets and weird theories that don't really make sense, but will add if enough anons nominate and understand it even if I don't.

>>9346

>Why are you holding a "baking class" in the middle of a Presidential Communications briefing?

>Seems like your scheduling is suspect. Don't you actually want anons to attend?

They're every Thursday retard.

>Why do you all NameFag?

There's one baker with a name right now which isn't used on /qresearch/, this is /comms/ which is where bakers talk about baking.

>Why does your "leader" mimic another anon from a spiritual borad on 8kun?

What the actual fuck does that even mean?

>Why does your "leader" mimic another anon from a spiritual borad on 8kun?

Seriously though, wut.

>>9358

Exactly. Summed up by this pic.

Honestly, I filter rainman sometimes when baking. It prevents me from starting shit while baking which would get me distracted.

>>9375

That's what I try to do.

If it's a slow bread and I actually find something interesting to discuss, I'll keep it to below 20 posts at the most.

>>9373

I've been keeping a namefilter on because of freddy and ebot, then sometimes I don't feel like seeing rainman spamming.

>>9385

Never liked that script and think it's dumb. If a baker has to talk about something whether it's notables or crumbs or something, or any other unforeseen thing they'll get faded by that script.

>>9381

>Have any ideas how to prevent that from happening?'

Use the JS that has your and Q's post counter at the top. It lets you scroll to it too. It can color the posts a different color too but I like it plain with just the scroller.

>>9396

I could care less honestly. I do my job properly when baking, add notables in the correct way, and have the bread baked before the last one is finished in time to post a fresh bread link.

As long as I do that I don't mind discussing something briefly if it's interesting.

>>9420

>>9419

So it seems the BO was solo for a while. I asked because of having a similar thought to you. It was taking forever for things to be deleted, edited, etc; so I asked the BO.

>>>/qresearch/8615224

>BO, what happened to the BVs? You don't need to get into any kind of dramatic details or anything, just wondering. Noticed only you are doing moderation now. If you need help I'm sure anons would step up if asked.

>>>/qresearch/8645510

>There was some internal drama but essentially all the BVs were fired during the downtime. To put it simply there were too many power struggles and games for what is essentially a janitor position. The job is not to shape opinion it's to have a functional place to discuss Q related topics where the full right of freedom of speech as allowed under US law. I have appointed 2 BV's.

Seems he was on his own due to "internal drama" and has now added 2 BVs, so things should be going faster I assume soon.

>>9450

Have you worked on them/understood what you were having trouble with?

>>9472

From what I read, it seems the BVs that BO had got fired during the shutdown, and BO just hired 2 new ones recently.

>>9481

Oh this is FJ, the current BO.

When I said shutdown I meant when 8chan got taken down and before 8kun was up.

>>9489

Well if it was as bad as he's implying, I'm glad they got fired.

It would've been a shit show with them on 8kun.

And no problem, not sure many saw that in meta.

>>9493

I saw that. At first I didn't understand what was going on because I had only just got there and thought someone was literally keeping the dough private so no one could check it, but realized doc was mistakenly using the "Paste Exposure" option instead of "Paste as guest" I think. It was resolved. I think I called him a faggot/retard or something once so sorry about that, kek.

>>9494

You too, and it's very recent and still there. Links are in my original post about it: >>9431

>>9508

Yup, I really haven't seen any BV in the board log yet. Maybe I've missed them but I still haven't seen much more activity from any BVs.

>>9528

>>9530

I honestly give him credit for the job he is currently doing. Not bringing anything from the past into it, the board is running well.

He could be faster on some deletions, edits, and other things but the BVs will help with that.

>>9537

>Who the hell did the actually baking for FJ once he threw all the regular bakers outta the kitchen?

I thought the other BVs did, and I think some bakers were allowed to because I saw the dough with their pastebins.

>>9551

All I know is my breads were locked immediately.

Really pissed me off.

>>9556

>>9550

Right here, kek.

Never left, still digging, making graphics, baking, etc. I've been focused on spreading info on twitter until my accounts suspended for nonsense reasons, on 4/pol/ studying the massive influx in attacks on Q and anons by shills, and making graphics/doing digs on /qresearch/. I bake many times a week, but since there's a lot of bakers always able to bake I don't need to bake as much. If there's a ghost handoff I'm there for or just think some baker could use a break if they say so then I'll take the handoff. Can still bake very well.

But none of the stupid shit mattered when 8chan got shutdown.

>>9556

>haven't hear from

And yes you have GYB, probably every day kek.

>>9562

That was such a ridiculous time on /qresearch/, so glad it's over.

>>9564

>>9565

No didn't do much baking on endchan, but was there for some of the shutdown. It was a comfy place during the chaos of 8chan being gone. Was mostly on 4chan trying to make /qresearch/ generals and them all getting deleted or moved, kek.

But the shitshow is over now, for now, and /qresearch/ is back to being a well oiled machine. I'm really glad it is.

>>9563

Yup all is well. Not too sure which baker you are but regardless thanks and have a good night baker.

>>9567

Also, these are great. There were attempts to do this within breads on /qresearch/ and it never went as well as these have.

I think they're really worthwhile and informative so I come just to answer questions or discuss things if needed.

It's very comical magaveli who seemingly is still butthurt thinks anyone attacking bakers is me KEK.

>>9603

Wouldn't hurt, even if he just lurks to see what's going on.

>>9606

>there are major differences between attacking a baker, criticizing a baker and helping a baker to correct an error

I didn't do either was my point.

>those who attack bakers on the basis of perceived "clownhood" etc

Honestly, that seems to mostly be Rainman/Megashill (you know who). But then there's a few people that still push the "baker's union", 'clownbaker", and other smears in the same exact way. I personally agree with magaveli that it's the former BVs and their allies attacking the board; I just disagree that I'm one of them kek. I dislike the former BVs as much as anyone else, they attacked bakers and the board for months.

>what is an 'absurd' number?

I don't mind if you can only fit one notable bun in the notables post of the dough if all those posts are truly notable. I'm fine with small, medium, and big buns as long as the posts are truly notable.

I do think anons should better understand what is and isn't notable though, because somethings they nominate really aren't even notable, but bakers put them in anyway because they were nominated.

>what is the point of notables?

I feel strongly about this actually. Not only are they for catching up, but many other great reasons. They're spread really easily because all these informative, creative, etc posts are grouped neatly for someone to spread around (wearethene.ws being a prime example of that capability). They're also great because an anon can see something that might help them in a dig, help them in a graphic, or maybe even get them to start a dig or graphic.

I really think what makes /qresearch/ unique and sets it apart from other general threads elsewhere on the chans ARE the notables. They're very much the epitome of "you/we are the news now". They have great potential when used well.

>baker ID

They're really not needed, but are more of a tradition at this point. Some anons like it, some don't. I stopped using mine when the BVs (who were fired) were attacking bakers. Having or not having a pastebin ID is irrelevant to baking well. I really think every single bakers does care and do a good job. The ID is irrelevant to that assessment.

>>9608

Well "Rainman/Megashill" is of course more of a term used instead of "shill" because everyone knows what he does every bread; but I understand your point.

The whole reason for the baker ID's and pastebins was to make sure a shill wasn't baking in the absence of a BO/BV to check because there were shills trying to bake and they'd fuck it up.

We wouldn't need IDs or even need to contemplate them if the BO or BVs would check on a handoff an anon's posts just to make sure they're not a shill. But I know NB for example (sorry using an ID again, kek) always had to post the pastebin because his IP would change so there were no posts for the check to find.

Also this lag or whatever you want to call it is horrible right now.

>>9610

>how to stop one

The bread the shill baked would be locked. And by "shills baking" I mean completely fucking up the dough, fucking up notables or even not taking them, and stuff like that.

And as for the who knows part that's why I rely on anons to say what's notable. I think bakers should continually encourage anons to nominate things and say in the notables updates if something was missed. You can't attack a baker for adding/not adding something if you didn't participate in the bread.

>>9613

Just saw your post. Post that here too.

Great job exposing that, I completely missed it because I wasn't on the board from early last night until this afternoon and that's a good rundown.

>>9614

I see it more as actual moderation than censorship. They can post all they want about whatever, but if they're making shill/bad bakes and spamming the catalog of course it'll get locked or deleted.

>>9615

>>9614

Also, been thinking about a baker meta thread here. Could be useful for discussing things about baking and other related things. An example is a couple bakers were discussing dough changes on /qresearch/ but were doing it over multiple breads; a meta thread here would have made that much simpler and in one place.

Just an idea I've had. It'd basically be what we're doing now but in a meta thread instead of the old seminar thread.

>>9620

Well that'd bump real threads off the catalog.

For example when someone makes 5 of the same threads there's no reason to keep 4 of them.

>>9626

Awesome. I just think it's a good idea and could be useful.

But I'm more talking about extreme circumstances, not really a type of thing where someone that doesn't have an ID or something bakes fine.

>>9630

Exactly, and other things too that would be good to be done or discussed in a thread specifically for those things and not across multiple breads.

>>9629

Thanks.

>>9634

It wouldn't replace the seminar threads of course, it'd just be a thread to do different things related to baking, and could serve as a place for anons that have a question while the seminar isn't in session too.

Oh and if one of you can tell magaveli I'm not the boogy man to blame for any and every shilling, that'd be great.

He's got this childish grudge that's comical but unnecessary.

BAKER, IF YOU'RE READING THIS, USE THE INDEX:

8kun.top/qresearch/res/8690789.html

8kun.top/qresearch/res/8690835.html

There's two breads.

Reposting this here for the record, originally here: >>>/qresearch/8699011

>>>/qresearch/8698806

>>>/qresearch/8698816

>>>/qresearch/8698830

This is very odd

The catalog seems to be missing a bunch of breads.

There's a big gap between bread #10963 and #11007.

All these crumbs, besides the one from the old UK bread, are within that range:

This crumb:

>>>/qresearch/8589057 ————————————–——– This is not another [4] year election. (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8589087, >>>/qresearch/8589386)

is from Q Research General #10997: Bon Voyage Edition

These crumbs:

>>>/qresearch/8573039 ————————————–——– Q #513 No Outside Comms (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8574299)

>>>/qresearch/8572999 ————————————–——– PF Post Patriots vs Traitors (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8574325)

>>>/qresearch/8572837 ————————————–——– Habeas Corpus Suspended (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8572906, >>8574346)

>>>/qresearch/8572583 ————————————–——– The Silent War continues.. (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8572604, >>>/qresearch/8572598 vid, >>>/qresearch/8574384)

are all from Q Research General #10976: Who's Flying This Bitch Anywho? Edition

I assume the old UK bread was within that range too, and because the last bread in the catalog as of right now is #10582, the Q posts from before that are still there.

The last crumb from Monday 03.23.2020 is from Q Research General #10931: This Was An Operation Edition; which is before the missing breads which start at #10963 so this link and all the others are active:

Monday 03.23.2020

>>>/qresearch/8538300 ————————————–——– The key that opens all doors. (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8538366)

>>>/qresearch/8537834 ————————————–——– PREVENT [[D] party destruction] BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8537877)

>>>/qresearch/8537514 ————————————–——– "the CHINA virus" (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8537554, >>>/qresearch/8537565, >>>/qresearch/8539010, >>>/qresearch/8538058, >>>/qresearch/8539081, >>>/qresearch/8539785 (vid))

Saturday 03.21.2020

>>>/qresearch/8509836 ————————————–——– Do not fear. (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8509881)

Monday 03.09.2020

>>>/qresearch/8358897 rt >>>/qresearch/8358859 ————————— GOD WINS (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8358921)

>>>/qresearch/8358831 ————————————–——– Backchannels are important when the 'news' itself is untrustworthy [controlled]. (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8358856)

>>>/qresearch/8357903 ————————————–——– Silent running is a tactic used when…. (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8359179)

>>>/qresearch/8357870 ————————————–——– Nothing can stop what is coming. Nothing! Rig for Red

The first crumb from Saturday 03.28.2020 is from Q Research General #11012: Frango Dura Patientia Edition.; which is after the missing breads which end at #11007 so this link and all the others are active:

Saturday 03.28.2020

>>>/qresearch/8601103 ————————————–——– Freedom Flag (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8601360)

>>>/qresearch/8601061 ————————————–——– The entire world is watching. (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8601342)

>>>/qresearch/8601001 ————————————–——– Decide for yourself (be free from outside opinion). (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8645430)

>>>/qresearch/8600954 ————————————–——– A person(s) value: (Cap: >>>/qresearch/8600998)

There's a big gap between bread #10963 and #11007, which seems to explain how the crumbs' links from Thursday 03.26.2020 and Friday 03.27.2020 are inactive.

Anons can check my work.

No idea what this baker's problem is.

There's no pastebin account, but it's the one that messes up bread titles all the time. I think it's the one I made this post about actually, kek: >>9328

I'm not sure the baker understands that the anons who are telling him the title's format is important for scrapping scripts are not shills.

He should attend a seminar!

>>9668

Read how the convo started. No anon is shilling the baker at all.

The title gets fucked up by mistake all the time and bakers know to just report it so it's fixed. Never really seen a reaction like this to anons notifying the baker of that.

The baker's doing great otherwise honestly.

>>9722

Yes we know baker.

>>9664

Follow up post:

>>>/qresearch/8710660

>>9730

I'm just making note of it. I'm not sure I've ever seen this happen.

There have been 404'd breads, but not this.

Thanks GYB (I think) for fixing my errors in the notables post of the dough. I had misnumbered the headers, but not the bread title and notable buns.

o7