Good evening, all.
Sorry for lateness.
Can shed some light on past practices/attitudes re: baker checking.
Please bear with me for a few minutes.
2018, baker checking was more or less a post history spot check from BO/BV's, ensuring that the anon volunteering to step into the kitchen wasn't a fuckhead.
In some cases, namely for those consistent regulars, it came down to a quick IP hash check instead of a scour of post history.
There was more trust for Bakers then, largely a position held by both 8bit and FJ before 5th column interference pushed the paranoia needle beyond reason. That and provided a decent modicum of leverage over shills - not even a retard would ever hijack the bread with that kind of backup from board staff; you had to [knowingly] interfere.
Wasn't perfect by any means - it added a level of intimidation for new volunteers, it couldn't prevent IP hopping and masquerading, and anyone could "infiltrate" by being consistent for a while and then blowing their load, and board staff had to be online to make it work - but it was effective.
Attitudes re: any kind of cooperation and smooth operation were naturally heavily attacked by shills.
Search also in the archives for "BO/BV please confirm" or similar language.
Heh, that'd be fun to wear to a rally, once they fire up again.
Will make it happen if POTUS comes back through this neck of the woods.
Hope you're doing well, GYB.
Heh, fair point.
Made life easy back then.
Good times.
Damn, could do for some scotch.
Got bourbon, though.
Good to see you too.
Apologies for interrupting.
Saw board lore being discussed and wanted to contribute.
Also, toasting in epic bread lesson.
Cheers to #17.
>"following what they call breadcrumbs"
No shit…
The normie flood is no lie, but nothing we haven't seen before.
Q's "gears of justice" post can attest to that.
>they had an outside comms thing goin' on and it all happened there apparently.
Confirmed.
>8bit was more or less tricked by FJ & crew to give up the board to FJ due to being overworked and gaslighted constantly and finally learned how deep the rot was
Respectfully, this is the correct order.
All else also correct.
The week leading up to 8bit's withdrawal was a clusterfuck and a half.
The rest happened after 8bit shut down a common outside comms avenue.
The worst part is that the BV team, being completely driven by paranoia and powertripping, took full advantage of any and all goodwill 8bit had towards the other board contributors.
Alinksy himself couldn't have conducted a better assault on board leadership.
Won't say no to a burger.
Crashing out for now, though.
May be able to bake tomorrow if scheduling allows.
Have a good night, man.
Great work as always, teach.
Take care, all.
I hope you all have a great night.
>it was a hash check to start, with pastebins and yous coming immediately after that as other accepted methods
This is correct.
>[8bit] said it was the baker's prerogative not to handoff if they didn't feel comfy doing so.
This is also correct… and a good point to bring up.
In the early days, shills were much more direct and outright about baking a separate moldy bread, all to sow confusion.
Can recall several instances during day shift when a handoff would be "rescinded" or "revoked" owing to a shill/saboteur showing their colors before the end of the bread.
In those instances, if they were online, board staff would intervene to ensure proper baking occurred and smooth kitchen operation was restored. They never banned anyone, but they made sure to highlight which bread was the good one and to lock down the moldy one.
Can also recall several instances where handoff requests were rescinded owing to high-volume Q posting; was a matter of ensuring all the Q material got into the dough before the next bake could start fresh.
Wasn't that the incoming baker couldn't handle the situation, but instead seemed like common courtesy not to hand someone a volatile kitchen.
Can also recall several instances where handoff requests were rescinded at pre-announced fixed points in the bread simply because no one would take up the request at all; once it's too late in a bread, might as well ride it out and, again, give the next baker, if one arrives at all, an opportunity to start fresh.
>[8bit's] recent comments
Could you please provide a link for reference?
…
Speaking candidly, I support the practice of a baker not handing off if they aren't comfortable doing so.
That said, the reason for such an action ought to be made plain by the baker, rapidly and concisely, so as to maintain transparency of action, quickly settle any disputes between bakers/avoid friendly fire, and ensure continued operation while the matter is settled.
Precedents for such actions and their subsequent resolutions exist.
>iconoclastic ideas… "Kitchen is Mine" mentality.
Boils down to an ego problem. Dealing with one's own is difficult; dealing with everyone else's is impossible. The courteous thing to do is set aside one's own ego such that no one else has to deal with it, but even that's difficult.
Everyone has some measure of pride regarding what they do and do well, but separating that pride from the vanity of believing you are the only one who can pull the job off, or that all others are lesser or saboteurs, is an exercise in self-discipline and ego control.
Tough to deal with indeed. Also good advice for new bakers: learn to put your ego aside.
Much appreciated, thank you.
Situation in discussion has since been resolved in the /comms/ meta.
Re: 8bit's stance:
…
That whole conversation on /qrb/ re: baker checks is a lesson in what happens when information/history gets memory-holed.
<muh dangerous path
Path was smoothed out long ago by those who took on responsibility to maintain it.
Then they abandoned that responsibility (see >>15620 ) and have not taken it up since.
Failure/refusal of the current board staff to take up such responsibility again does not mean that the responsibility was pointless/ineffective; it was demonstrably effective in keeping shills out of the kitchen.
Would not be opposed to its reinstatement and a return of cooperation between BO/BV's and volunteer Anons… but that would require leadership.
Fully agreed, given the history.
>ask yourself if this is a man you could really trust.
Oh, fuck no. Idea of return to previous protocols and good board staff relations was wistful/wishful thinking.
>Smug, controlling, contemptuous of anons.
Vanity.
Nothing saying we can't repeat the positive/successful aspects of history.
Might even come up with something better in the process.
But then it wouldn't be repetition. So it goes.
Test.
The canary is alive.
This canary will be dead when I am wholly unable to volunteer.
Posts with this tripcode and only this tripcode will indicate the status of the canary.
If a user cannot produce this tripcode to resurrect the canary when it is dead, then that user is fake under any and all circumstances.
Pastebin canary (https://pastebin.com/5RycnQW7) is tied to this canary; if one canary is dead, both canaries are dead; if one canary is alive, both canaries are alive.
Test again.
The canary is dead.
Godspeed, Anons.
God bless you.
Keep kicking ass.
I hope you all have a good day.