>>418

this post will be very helpful

to get anons up-to-date on the shitshow

Synopsis of the degradation of QR General

(((BO))) glows

>>>/qresearch/7003060 pb

Anon points out

>>>/qresearch/7003276 pb

Q confirms Anon

>>>/qresearch/7003300 pb

(((BO))) acts stupid

>>>/qresearch/7003509 pb

(((BO))) starts deleting notable buns from new bread and locks new breads

>>>/qresearch/7006571 pb

>>>/qresearch/7006175 pb

>>>/qresearch/7006558 pb

8bit rescinds endorsement of FastJack

>>>/qrb/219 ob

as long as qresearch isn't nuked by shillBO

>>424

and there a good few more even worse posts by FJ not listed in there

>>553

>This has been argued now and again, but it's agreed that the list remains the standard. Newfags don't know shit for quite some time, agreed?!

fully agree.

the notables, useful as they are, have always been an easy source of conflict and fuckery.

last night's attack (ongoing) was just as much if not more on the archives and resources than on notables, and there is not a single good excuse for that stated yet.

thank you very much for your precious service, map anon

>>582

99% of the time thistle is no problem, pic or no pic.

but in a moment of crisis like this, the use of pic for "authority" is at the very least suspicious

>>586

because it's not an argument.

tons of anons here & there have been along just as long if not longer than thistle and don't use artificial means to inflate their authority.

as i said, i don't mind him picfagging for ordinary posts, but when chiming in during a crisis, the advantages/abuse is easy to see

>>592

>where does McThistle get this 'authority' ?

only from what he says and the validity of arguments presented, not from who he is

>and how is it 'artificially inflated'?

because a picture (that anyone could repost anyway) is not an argument, it is an appeal to authority (does not mean it is recognized either)