>Almost word for word what the /mrn/ baker crew have said.
They're mumbling but not really saying anything there right now.
All eyes are waiting for Tom to chime in.
Please only grab well-sourced newsfags.
I agree.
That's correct.
A famous one was Trump's in 2017.
Joe is in the Same relative time frame right now.
Please don't Note without Sauce.
Please define sauce: a link? a cap?
Bakers choice but would like to know standards used.
kek you're a good Baker
I'm fine with that in terms of Bakers Choice.
I'd like to see newsfag posts include more copypasta sauce showing the sourcing used in the articles.
You say let Anons read and decide to comment on sketchy ones.
There's usually time for that before they're finalized.
I don't like it but you're not wrong.
I like when Anon Eyes Always On.
2 thoughts:
-
Come on, man. Look first
-
Dough too bloated half that shit can be put in a sticky in the catalog in locked status with a dough pointer.
Please take it out of the section before the dough.
That addy needs front page listing so thumbs up on having it in the OP.
I agree completely.
Q Aggs / qresearch / anything else Anons say they find most frequently used or helpful for newfags in the OP.
The rest can be in the Catalog locked and stickied with a link to it in the dough.
Dough is too bloated many such cases of eyes glossing over.
>otherwise we have no notables.
During my long ago ('18) Short Baking Career I had no issues doing that.
Was not popular.
Nobody uses Kitchen Meta to address the what and why.
FJ treats it like shit and ignores it.
At least Tom will police his shit but now he can't talk because he's between a rock and a hard place.
>just because Baker adds a notable doesn't mean anons believe the source.
My issue is that Notables are Quasi-Endorsements.
When poorly sourced shit is in there that soon gets BTFO'd as F&G… QR takes a hit like it or not.
I like Bakers like this one that respond back with reasoning behind actions.
I like Anons that express opinions pro/con but defend Baker when you perceive bad dealings.
>this one is rarely said while it's opposite all the time
It sure seems not shilly in here.
>Real anons know about the name fag manufactured baker wars.
Concur. I was referring (poorly possibly) to outsiders/lurkers that depend upon quality Notes from here.
>personally I prefer this to Bakers lording over what gets added or not
I concur yet again.
Anons fought a Civil War over that issue (and others).
Prefer this model warts and all.
With a pic that could have been a legit Notable.
I just want better analysis.
I want to store the sourcing (anonymous?/Real?) in my mind as well.
Sure I can take the time to read every article, but why can't the copypaster do 1 little extra thing?
Most Anons don't leave the exit ramp to read them all so that's the reality of the situation.