Baking, but here as well
Why did your mother take dick from truckers at the rest stop, the world may never know
You guys realize that was not me baking, since it seems I am being blamed for it. I said we should ALL have pastebins.
Also, I didn't disappear, I had never had to bake from index before and totally forgot I could
>>9648 pb
>Anyone here, I've tried tor and clearnet, neither will create a new bake
o7
Still waiting for an answer of why the guy that teaches the baking class is working with Rainman to gaslight fellow bakers. Seems like a fair question
Once again,
-
why do only certain bakers get attacked by rainman
-
evidence is clear as day in the posts I have made
-
Why is Rusty, BO of /comms/ (apologies to teach or any other bakers lumped into my "teaches the baking class" comment) assisting Rainman and piling on bakers?
>What i would ask you here is this:
>What specifically has made you think the kitchen is comp'd?
>Can you cite examples?
>You mention Rusty here but elsewhere, you mentions a "crew".
>What crew? Who comprises it?
-
Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
-
Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
yes, Rusty was attacking me while I baked and working with rainman to create a graphic to gaslight me. Would you not have a "burr in your saddle as well?"
Why would Rusty post my Paastebin account name without being asked to then be used in a graphic by rainman to attack me? Waiting on a reasonable answer.
>NO. These proofs are not impossible. if there is a bakers union bent on taking over QR, there should be clear evidence to show which bakers are involved and what exactly they are doing to take over the board.
The evidence is the consistent attempts to censor information. Why are you diverting the subject away from the questions at hand, namely -
-
Why post my pastebin name?
-
When has Rusty ever posted another bakers pastebin name previous to this event?
-
Why are other Bakers jumping in to defend Rusty's actions? I didn't post his pastebin account to be used in a graphic to gaslight him, yet I am the one the other Bakers are piling on.
-
Why is Rusty attacking bakers by his own admission in a busy bread along with Rainman
-
Why does Rainman only attack certain bakers directly
-
Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
There we go, finally an admission of truth, all I was looking for.
Now, I'd like you to realize why exactly I was responding to rainman the way I was, it was for these 2 graphics to show exactly his game .
-
no matter what a baker does Rainman will attack the baker.
-
Rainman purposely posts pb notables and refuses to repost even the good ones to set up false pretences to attack the baker.
I didn't want to bake that evening, I did so that I could goad Rainman into doing exactly what the fuck he did. As I have said before, I find Rainman hilariously transparent. What pissed me off was you having the nerve to tell me about "bakers code" and then join in with rainman without knowledge of why I was doing what I was doing.
Look at the other breads I have baked while he was there, hardly any responses. I went into the bake planning to get him to do exactly what I knew he would. Pics related.
Now, you know my reasoning as I said before in
>if I want to banter with the retards that attack (which I do for a specific reason, pic related) that's none of your concern
No, I'm done, I've said my piece, Rusty shouldn't have piped up when I was baking and certainly shouldn't have posted my pastebin. Anyone that disagrees with that I question their motives, but now everyone knows why I was goading rainman. >>9780 If you look I wasn't baking the bread previous to this, I did what I did for a reason.
Won't bring it up again.
>"Rainman" isn't stupid, but most of the posts are 90% bullshit. You'll notice I said 90%, because "Rainman" is clever in a way, always (or nearly always) has some not-bullshit mixed in.
>The trick I'd like you to learn is to ignore "rainman's" taunts & bullshit, extract the occasional gem and move on.
He isn't all that intelligent either.
Yea, I knew that if I offered to bake his "notables" he would refuse to post them. If you look at the bread before that he was attacking a different baker relentlessly. So I took the bake, offered 5 times to bake his notables and he refused to repost them while screaming "comped baker" If you think highlighting and redtexting my own post from 2 posts above yours is some sort of gotcha than the only question I have left is on your intelligence.
>posted are getting put in qresear.ch for diggers, Q is being served
I don't serve Q, I serve POTUS, my country and the anons begging and fighting for change. Q is the means to that change.
Still going after I said I was done. Exposing yourself further. The graphic shows no matter what a baker does rainman will attack, even when he gets his way on notables, and every time he pulls that shit the graphic can be used to quell other anons that don't know any better and think he has a point. Why do you attack me and defend rainman over and over? What stake do you have in his game?
>your deliberate actions are causing reactions that feed your paranoia you are causing much drama and giving ammunition to enemy actors
It was your actions siding with rainman over a fellow baker that caused this drama, no amount of ad hominem attacks from your end will obscure the truth of situation. I've shown evidence, you've admitted you did what you did and yet you still try to entice an emotional response to obscure your guilt.
-
Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
>delusions of grandeur as well
Attacking me mental state again, the only truth you've finally spoken was that you posted my pastebin specifically for rainman to use, which shows cooperation between yourself and rainman.
Also, you've suddenly changed your typing style, why is that?