>Doesn't matter what the public thinks.
Actually anon that's the literally the only reason we are waiting so god damned long to come out with it and wrap this up
>anons post content
>other anons nominate as notable
>baker adds to notables
That is how it has always been done, for thousands of breads
It's not my fault you nigger bakers think it's the bakers job to editorialize the notables
If I bake, I'm not going to go through and decide myself what to add
I will only add what anons tell me to add, as it should be
Fuck off you painfully obvious redtexting shill
Anons do
Ever notice how there is a near constant slide surrounding notables, if any were missed, shill baker notables, etc?
That's because shills push our processes to have gaps, then exploit those gaps to create constant slides
When bakers would only use notables that were nominated, there was ZERO chance of any fuckery whatsover
When bakers handed off to each other, there was ZERO chance of split bread fuckery
When bakers would religiously use the same banner, it was easy to identify the next bread in the catalog at a glance and kept things consistent.
Notice how these very simple and very effective processes have been attacked and changed by shills?
Checking evil digits to confirm you're retarded
In the past, fucking with notables meant they wouldn't include them, or they would edit them beyond what anons nominated
Hurr durr newfag
>day 1 anon with several Q (you)s
ok
In the old days, if a shill tried to fuck with notables, anons would know immediately
There was an objective standard to notables, so if they edited anything or left out any anon nominations then we could call it out right there and force the shill out
If the notables list is up to the baker, it creates a process where there is no objectively correct notable posts, and so anons can't really audit them
Instead, it leads to nonstop sliding and division
Are you a shill or just stupid?