#109 missing baker is either retarded or yet another 'mistake'

>#109 missing baker is either retarded or yet another 'mistake'

#109 missing baker is either retarded or yet another 'mistake'

>You have to go back, you fucked it up

>>97092

Agree

>>97106

100% mouldy

>>97150

GNUpol you have to go back. Bakers union was poison then and its poison now.

>>97162

>>97164

>>97165

Baker was getting flamed so he deleted the thread. I wont take this lying down.

>>97180

Hey you know the way you have mentioned you are in contact with the BO. Can you get him to post the audit trail for the (((deleted))) thread please. That will clear all this straight up.

>Proofs you didnt delete the thread or go back to plebbit

I want an explanation from the BO as to why the Baker thinks its ok to delete threads?

>I want an explanation from the BO as to why the Baker thinks its ok to delete threads?

I want an explanation from the BO as to why the Baker thinks its ok to delete threads?

>I want an explanation from the BO as to why the Baker thinks its ok to delete threads?

<I aint going away until I see actual proofs that the baker was so buthurt he deleted a CBTS thread.

>And we are being called shills for making a fuss over a DELETED CBTS thread

>How do we know it wont be done with Q posts in it.

<RED FUCKING ALERT

>>97418

AT help!

Baker deleted thread before last.

See start of thread 108 (109 not created two 108's) for the WTFs

We got bakers union back I think

>>97453

108 was recreated after baker deleted, no 109 created

<Spreadsheet please do the next bake

>>97503

Already here, baker deleted original thread 108 and then basically shrugged at us for asking questions.

<Next Q post is getting deleted if this guy is running the bake

>Remember to screencap next Q posts.