Request for comment

Is it worth engaging?

Problem: Some big Q connected Social Media accounts spreading information that is blatantly false and easily disproved (not Q related).

Misleading some into believing a deception. This is common on the internet in general, and can easily be dismissed by those that can discern.

Solution(s): Provide factual dig evidence disputing the deception head on.

Ignore it smh and move on (allowing people to possibly learn to trust only themselves to find the truth, rather than another popular name/acct).

Not worried about blow-back personally. Mostly the reference is to some famefags that put out bullshit (won't specify which currently).

In the current case it is also an insult to veterans, and good people.

WW(Y)D?

[I tend to tackle it head on regardless of who it is, and damn the consequences]

Will be gone awhile

>>4101

>Suggest kicking it around with social media warriors on >>>/warroom/4178

There is a reason started here (something F). ;)

Take social media out of the question (see below).

>>4103

>I hope that its a simple mistake on them and they will correct their errors.

They have been pushing it for awhile.

It is a complete and easily (20-30 minute dig) disproved idea.

Most likely because of the fame level of the individual pushing it could blow up.

–

Below

It is imho more about the reason we got into this situation we are fighting against in the first place.

Few stood up and said Bullshit to the big names in MSM, politics, hollywood, and "authority" in general.

Also imho the citizens forgot their duty to be the Balance against tyranny.

My understanding is that the movement is about truth, exposing lies, and teaching people to think for themselves.

Not replacing a failed MSM with another vehicle which may in the end prove the same susceptibility to being compromised.

It is a measure of how awake people are to see so many support a message without researching to see if it has any basis in fact.

It is about right versus wrong.

In general I will engage regardless of name/fame/imagined rank, or other factors.

The problem is doing so may either increase influence or completely devastate it.

Is it worth engaging a falsity and risking influence.

>>4106

>If it's a topic that abcu writers have overlooked

It probably hasn't been addressed yet.

And just reading the responses (see there is a reason asked here first) has increased potential avenues of approach by several factors.

It may not even be a huge deal to some. Perhaps a better approach (this thought brough to you by ABCU minds) is a general statement about "Think for Yourself" - "research for yourself" - "Trust Yourself" - "Verify then trust"

>>4107

>most of these guys believe what they post IMO

Has crossed my mind that it is just window lickers….many times

>>4108

>TRUTH is my agenda.

^^

>when I get mad enough about something

That's my secret I'm always angry. Focusing it into a well honed weapon of truth is why I'm here in part.

It could be completely irrelevant in the big picture, I just tend to embody pic related (old xkcd).

>>4110

>Still have no idea what "topic" you brought up initially. Sposed to guess? Or sposed to stay in the dark?

Topic was left out, more of a question of is it worth it to engage these accounts that say they are part of Q or let them expose themselves I suppose. Some do right away others have a huge following and would be immediately recognized imo.

Trying to avoid adding bias with to much detail.

Think in general terms of subjects like D.U.M.B.s/rescuing children/EQ or Wayfair…lots of other BS pushed out there by famefags

or even more generally "Fantastical claims, no sauce" yet people gobble it up

>>4116

>Not all big accounts will stay true to the fight.

>[sleepers]

Crossed my mind.

The other reason asked here initially is this doesn't just apply to social media in the 40k view.

I knew what the answer I wanted was, and remained vague as to details to get the most data.

ex.

[Search: Bob]

vs

[Search: Robert Mueller]

I know, I'm weird

>>4121

>I tried I got similar results for both via LORD GOOGLE.

kek

–

Thanks to all for responses has added greatly to my thought process - humbly honored for your time.

>>4103

Responded with facts to each post in a long thread felt needed an alternate viewpoint, as the viewpoint presented was off.

Gained two new anons in process and probably didn't cause any harm to either of us.

Offered a valid opposing view, with sauce (unlike their thread).

>>4147

>>4152

Always think about the crumb about Unicorns.

They do exist, all of the big tech startups "in the garage" Gulag, Amazon, Apple…would be surprised if it was all C_A with tax dollars…we own all of it.

>>4159

Looks great, shared it

>>4260

Possibly, not sure they would be that accurate

>>4262

Yes

They usually leave a tell, even when switching character. Can't resist…not to say it isn't possible though.

It has become harder to determine with certainty with the influx since downtime.

>>4265

>These are solid.

o7

It's a bird, it's a missile, it's Mighty Mouse!

Sums up yesterday.

>Looks like it. Using ITs Tilda and all ~

Good to know wasn't tracking to closely