>>15538375
>why Jim glad for a change?
because qresearch has been a royal pain in the ass. FJ was a nasty, hostile jerk. doxxed private convo between JW and employee, etc. I had similar experiences with him early on. Gamer guy who never allowed anons to be staff.
>>15539084
OSS has been trying to wear anons down for 2 years. Hasn't worked. We are here, he is not. Long game is what matters.
>>15539864
The idea floated about word filtering is not mine, was proposed to me. Agreed to talk with anons about it. I'm more of the mind that anons can filter and staff can delete when possible. Not like spam is something new and exotic. kek.
Agree on #3.
Name-fagging controversy is big headache.
i liked being anon as digger, still am anon for that. when becoming a baker, liked having a name - convenient, helpful, made a tough job easier. learned about difs among bakers, handy to know. bakers i've worked with on a daily basis all had names. they are the most service oriented people i've ever known, even IRL. Here long hours, every day, for years. Some are now bvs here. Never woulda happened with complete anonymity - trust only comes with a track record.
Thoughts?