Anonymous ID: 750a4a Jan. 24, 2022, 10:29 a.m. No.15450434   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0506 >>0578 >>0611 >>0640 >>0769 >>0954 >>0966 >>0976

>>15450243

 

I got a shitload to do as BO, don't want to focus mostly on baker squabbles.

 

But seems to be that case that the signed in e-baker doesn't want to note, so another baker who's not signed in feels justified in stealing the bake - and got his baker locked by BV.

Have i got that right?

 

Here's what i'd say so far:

 

  • When bakers are signed in, they are signed in. That matters.

  • Some bakers like to notable, others do not. One reason is long bread with many notables, a situation we are trying remedy - see >>15449227

  • It is MUCH BETTER for bakers to notable - that is (or should be) the NORM, not the exception.

If there is a baker who will notable, it would be better is the baker who cannot or will not notable to HANDOFF to baker who WILL.

For obvious reasons: it is BEST for the BOARD.

 

AS BO, WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THIS COURSE OF ACTION.

Could become a policy, but needs discussion - in META thread.

 

RIGHT NOW, by tradition, signed in baker has authority.

if e-baker will not take notes, wny doesn't the baker who WILL notable simply volunteer to take notes? He may not like that, but it would be helpful.

 

CURRENT E-BAKER (gerbil?):

if you can't take notes and another baker can, if it's not oss, PLEASE HANDOFF.

We don't have a policy on this but probably need one.

Right now, am just asking for your cooperation to make this board function well.

 

OTHER BAKER (Papi?):

Understand your frustration but if you try to steal the dough from the signed in baker, BVs will not allow it if present - because we need to follow the chain of custody for avoid more anarchy on this board.

 

BOTH OF YOU, please try to work together.

Come to META please, we can work this out.

''Meanwhile, if note-taker is needed, would appreciate it if SOMEBODY would step up''

.

  • BO

Anonymous ID: 750a4a Jan. 24, 2022, 10:42 a.m. No.15450524   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0534 >>0537 >>0541 >>0544 >>0559 >>0769 >>0954 >>0966 >>0976

>>15450479

>The only Solution I have for anons is to abandon the board that the shills now control. This shit would have NEVER slid with me as BV.

 

The problems and confusion that now exists here - TEMPORARILY - were caused by YOU. You and your cronies lost this board as a result of carelessness and spite.

 

We will RESTORE IT now.

It will take time.

There will be things to THRASH OUT.

But we will do it TOGETHER:

 

ANONS

BAKERS

ADMIN

 

Make QResearch Great Again

Anonymous ID: 750a4a Jan. 24, 2022, 10:58 a.m. No.15450611   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0617 >>0634 >>0769 >>0954 >>0966 >>0976

>>15450434

>>15450506

>Shortening bread length

Think this would be good but it's a new idea, needs discussion. META is the place.

tx for your efforts.

 

>>15450551

>I HAVEN'T BEEN ALLOWED TO BAKE SINCE THEY FIRST BANNED ME FOR NO REASON, SAUCE ATTACHED, AND YET IT IS MY FAULT THEY ARE GATEKEEPING THE BAKES/NOTABLES. SEE HOW THAT WORKS?

BANNED FOR NO REASON?

UNJUST?

How ironic.

Anonymous ID: 750a4a Jan. 24, 2022, 11:11 a.m. No.15450699   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0718 >>0769 >>0954 >>0966 >>0976 >>1152

>>15450616

TYB

a long time, it's often been unclear WHO has the dough, if anyone. Easily fixed by baking protocols:

 

When there is an e-bake, e-baker is STILL PRESUMED TO BE THE BAKER

unless he says something like

 

Baker requires handoff

Ghosting @50

 

A baker steps up with

Can bake

 

followed by a formal handoff:

Handoff confirmed?(from ebaker)

Confirmed, i got the bread(from new baker

 

Acknowledged(from ebaker)

 

Then it's EASY for EVERYONE to see who has the bake.

These protocols work when used consistently.

 

 

Use protocols also for alerting anons when you must leave:

 

Baker requires handoff @400, any bakers in the house?

or

Baker seeks handoff next bread

 

That way, we are COVERED from bread to bread.

Always link to DOUGH post and NOTABLES updates.

 

''Will put this info in the new BAKING thread.''