>>11491703 lb

You seem very concerned about financial freedom.

Yes, of course, people can use Blockchain for bad things. Should we ban steakknives because, even though they're made to be utensils for eating, they could hurt someone.

Oh, and should we ban boats because they can transport drugs or other bad things?

Should we ban airplanes because someone could suicide bomb a building?

Should we ban phones because someone could coordinate a heist or murder?

Should we ban the internet because bad guys could exchange classified information?

Should I keep going, or are you done drooling everywhere?

>>11491978

You're just cracking consensus.

Yes, criminals use blockchain currencies.

They also use cars, guns, telephones, computers, they wear clothes, I bet some of them even have moms.

Should we ban moms too, since some bad guys have moms?

>>11492034

Thanks for your help, brainlet.

>>11492146

I feel like your job is to be stupid on purpose, but criminals using something just means it's useful, not that it's inherently detrimental.

This is a pisspoor argument.

I could make a list of benefits of Blockchain that would dwarf your puny little example of a bad thing about it, but I don't feel like putting that much effort in to validating you with a response like that.

Please come back and try to sit at the big boy table again once you've done your research and abandoned the concerned frame.

>>11492277

If only there were a simple way to upend the bankster system…

>>11492958

Yeah, I've only been suggesting we berate all bakers about how unimportant they are until baking resumes normalcy, like when bakers just baked and didn't stoke drama and bullshit at every oppurtunity.

>>11493024

I don't see how some of you are still falsely interpreting the drop.

Q was taking a jab at the paytriots like the youtube/twitter faggots that keep calling all of us "Qanons".

Q was not saying "stop calling us Qanon". Q was saying that those of us who come here and who aren't affiliated with Q are just simply "anonymous".

It doesn't matter what we call Q. We didn't call FBIanon just "FBI". We didn't call meganon "meg". I could keep going, hopefully you get the idea though.

>>11493076

The reason the week slide of changing or not changing the thumbnail occurred was because a bunch of brainlets couldn't comprehend that changing everything wasn't apart of Q's direction.

Q simply set out to delineate between Q and Anons.

Q is Q Clearance Patriot or Qanon. All three of those names apply because it doesn't matter what we call anyone and it never has.

Read this shit and quit yawning at me when I'm trying to help you stop falling for bait.

>>11493099

>>11493119

>>11493145

I can't help but think you're all being stupid on purpose.

This is very simple.

There are no "Qanons". But that doesn't mean we can't call Q Qanon after we all did it for three years.

You don't distance yourself from flack. You agree and amplify.

You people are literal amateurs and it's becoming palpable.

>>11493206

I'm trying to help you avoid their vying for control.

Don't you understand the futility of the argument?

You're becoming a satire of what you're criticizing, anon…

You're twisting yourself in to a pretzel.

>>11493232

So are you forgetting our years of graphics, write ups referring to qanon, the normies tweeting about qanon and all of the different websites we've made, like qanon.pub?…

This is ridiculous, anon. One of the most useful tools we've configured to navigate this movement is literally a website called QANON.pub

Someone, somewhere, is laughing at you right now.

>>11493235

I feel like you're just being stupid on purpose, like I said.

I think we've come full circle.

>>11493319

OSS isn't very helpful and the anon is likely just another comms fag that's trying to ensure we get less valuable digs done or have less valuable discussion.

>>11493367

You saturate the living shit out of this board with needless MEfagging, you broke our rules, you split breads and you perpetuate this ego-baking bullshit, seemingly in tandem with the comms fags.

>>11493410

No one gets to pick their name on chans and deciding three years later what we are or aren't allowed to call the amorphous "leader" of this movement is utterly pointless.

>Media labeling as 'Qanon' is a method [deliberate] to combine [attach] 'Q' to comments _theories _suggestions _statements [and ACTIONS] made by 2.

This line is speaking about individuals, not Q themselves. Q is speaking about discrediting anons on different platforms by labeling them, which can allow justification for censorship to seep in through the technological levers used by [them] and all of this should be obvious to you, but it seems like you're just trying to slide and police language.

>>11493556

People are just realizing that the faggots that want to change a bunch of shit that has gone untouched for a couple of years are just here to distract them and are caring less about the screeching brainlets who are vying for control of a bunch of autistic kids that live with their parents and gorge themselves with tendies while they post pictures of frogs on the internet like they don't know how futile that is.

>>11493660

Not you, weeb. I like you. I'm talking about OSS.

Posting with an avatar gets you socialized here for good reason. Not being de-egoed is imperative.

I'm fully aware of your overton window, anon. I know I don't need to explain what the ego really is to you and I'm sure I don't need to explain why /ourguys/ taught us to abandon it.

>>11493711

My issue is with OSS, anons.

No one else avatarfags and splits breads.

>>11493764

>Not being de-egoed is imperative.

I meant to erase "not".

>>11493768

Anons have long used that naming convention.

Sometimes we substitute the "anon" part of names with "fag".

Like boatanon or boatfag

They can be interchangeable.

>>11493790

Yeah, you're just a newfag…

It's moran, maroon.

>>11493830

topest of keks

>>11493843

Don't let the impotent brainlets confuse and distract you, anon.

Policing language lasts very briefly here and so does making demands. Most of us are more likely to do the exact opposite of what you demand of us just to spite you.

>>11493932

bleh

i dunno, anon…

you don't make bad points.

>>11493942

meh I think its definition has been fluid in that it's meant "someone who is egoposting" for a few years now.

so, OSS, you think fj just had some foresight with comms?

also, how do you explain me having been there a little more than a year ago and getting great nutritional advice? do you think that was just someone else who wasn't in on the stupid bullshit where they larp as anons?

also, what do you make of the other boards they use here on kun?

>>11493981

You really think you know specifically who it was that first posted using the moniker?

I'm still convinced it's not anything close to any of the guesses most anons have made in a public capacity.

>>11493996

fren has been around for many years. we're all frens, fren.

guud is one of their handshakes

moran is a handshake we used, like asking if traps are gay, to figure out if someone is a newfag or not.

firmed and handy I haven't seen much, but I'd guess it's also another comms handshake

I want to be clear that moran is the only handshake I've seen anons using for literal years. fren is just a meme and is also a years-long memory. I think the others are solely comms handshakes.

hopefully this helps, bk.

>>11494077

yeah, but do you see why they're interchangeable?

ultimately, it doesn't matter what we call it. all we're doing is socializing them and that's one of the things these environments teach you, which was crafted and manicured by /ourguys/.

>>11494115

see above

but, it's cool, anon. see >>11494031

it is awfully odd…