How I see it.
OSS started the fight.
Gaslighting of solid, dependable baker crew (that [they] call /comms crew) began and has continued since then.
OSS & random bakers breads get more posts and have shitty careless notables, so they are "winning" in the sense of being seen by the majority of anons.
/comms bakers continue baking parallel breads to demonstrate that they are dutiful patriots. However the result is that the pushback from OSS + allies continues, and the breads are split, which is a terrible result.
Wondering:
What would it take to alter the aggregator(s) to handle multiple/parallel breads?
Code change, but wouldn't be too terribly hard…?
What if anons came up with a numbering scheme like #10844a, #10844b etc.?
Q posted in the breads that had the highest post count for the #, just like most anons do.
That does not indicate Q taking a side in the "argument". Q has to post someplace.
/comms bakers are righteously pissed because of the false accusations continually being thrown about them. But being pissed is not sufficient reason to split the breads.
Maybe better for them to consider baking anonymously? Somehow portray that as a more patriotic posture than baking old-style breads?
I could be wrong about all of this. But when I was baking with the /comms frens, I KNOW I was not doing anything bad, and did not see anything bad that baker frens were doing either.
OSS, by keeping on posting the HUGE collections of graphics blaming certain bakers, (1) then accuses /comms bakers of excluding notables (HIS 'notables') and (2) divides the attention of some of the most attentive anons, who developed their attentiveness due to continually baking.
Whatever the cause, split breads is very detrimental.