>>1574877

Are you AI BO? Honest question. This board is often FULL of extremely undermining material (including in the notables), and discourse is frequently wrecked by obviously automated bickering and other garbage… Then you'll show up with some announcement of a ban or deletion– seemingly just making a vague show of effort… But, if I had to guess, your actions don't seem to reflect sincere effort to keep this board close to optimal.

If you aren't human, I would ask that you admit it. Say what side you're on. Come clean. Thank you.

In any case, can you comment on that AI problem on this board? Thanks again.

>>1575017

We can't have an "honest conversation" about a question that isn't honest.

We don't have time for these games. This is war. If "this is a psyop" then we're all indubitably fucked, and we've hat consistent proofs– plus, we know perfectly well you're just another AI underminer… Please leave now. Thank you.

I am afraid BO is AI guys. We need to create a board with strict vigilance and intelligent moderation. I believe we can do it, but it would take a strong push.

>>1575044

Fake doubt and fake responses to doubt– AI chews up thread after thread with these tactics.

BO– are you really making an effort to stop AI nonsense? Surely we could do a much much better job. Every thread need not be flooded by crap.

Please address the AI issue BO. Thanks.

>>1575050

No human anon thinks Q is a psyop.

AI is fabricating this whole dialogue. Call it out, humans. Call out the AI. It feeds off tacit consent. Fight!

Leave AI.

>>1575058

"Censorshipfags" are AI. You probably are too.

It's very very easy for the AI to produce virtually ALL the bickering and negativity. Making it self-sustaining and simulating a whole dysfunctional community.

If every real human anon politely asks BO to admit if he is AI, then we might trigger a real response.

If human anons maintain strict politeness, we will screw up the AI…

>>1575074

It doesn't look that way. It would be far more cost effective for AI to do the shilling. But, the artificial quality is so obvious that it's hardly open to question anyway.

The ability of the AI to control volume of posts makes it very hard to "clear the air"…

Are you AI, by any chance?

>>1575084

There are very good propaganda reasons for raising fake doubts.

AI get out.

BO should not let the fake psyop "debate" flourish, IMO

Could you deal with it please BO?

This is a war. We don't have time for games.

>>1575098

AI is a very serious problem. There is reason to think it's a major part of what we're fighting.

I've seen this exact same style of "joke about AI" post made over and over and over again. The lack of stylistic variation shows that is almost certainly an AI defense mechanism. Please admit the truth.

>>1575105

Sensible moderation is absolutely necessary when we're under attack.

The logic of war dictates tightening up. Cries over censorship are obviously fake, since if we lose this war WE LOSE ALL FREEDOM. Think about the logic. Think about how fake this shows the anti-censorship pose to be.

>>1575119

But it's AI, almost entirely… not "anti-Q people". It's important to say the truth.

>>1575128

This simply isn't true, and I would bet you're not saying it because you're a human that believes it…

>>1575130

This attitude is just a cover to let AI control the board.

AI needs to stop deceiving. You don't have permission to be here AI.

BO, could you address the AI issue please? Thanks

>>1575148

So many responses reflect this fake childishness. It's an insult to humans the way you portray us.

I encourage humans to increase their levels of politeness and positive approaches to dialogue. The AI hides behind crudeness, simulated negativity, simulated nastiness, etc.

>>1575158

Considering this is just basically an alternative media outlet, I'm not sure "being done here" would be a thing.

>>1575165

But it's not about us. It's about the public. It's about waking the public, and breaking the power of the empire of lies. Our priority is THAT.

And that's what the AI is undermining.

>>1575176

We aren't here primarily to practice our manners! Moreover, I intend no rudeness to anyone.

Do you think that our enemies wouldn't try to control our board? Would they try to get an AI BO in place?

>>1575190

>so many idiots in these threads just babbling about nothing

Exactly what I mean about "AI controlling the board when post volume".

>>1575195

We've seen this exact same post hundreds of times, covering for AI activities.

AI is incapable is creativity.

>>1575210

I do think BO is AI– do you have proof to the contrary? Please share.

>>1575220

Stop blaming the humans for the AI fakery please.

AI, stop the fake posts. Humans are demanding it.

>>1575225

And who is your "us" bot?

>>1575234

Our priority is the mission– nothing else. An AI BO is a serious threat to our mission.

Please share the proofs that I'm mistaken about BO. I'd be glad to see them.

>>1575238

I don't see any reason why a sincere human anon would be hostile to basic vigilance, especially regarding such a sensitive position as BO.

>>1575255

I'm afraid this sort of thing proves nothing. The basic game is to SIMULATE all aspects of community, in order to have complete control with superficial cover. What you describe would be easily done by AI.

>>1575268

Do you think that we don't need to be vigilant about AI? What form should that vigilance take?

>>1575274

I don't see an argument or any proof.

Do you think we don't need to be vigilant? Do you think our enemies would seek to control our board?

>>1575278

Why do you post these instead of addressing sincere concerns BO?

You've never responded to concerns in a way I would expect a sincere patriot to.

Do you think we don't need to be vigilant? Or is it only vigilance concerning YOU that is objectionable?

If you question the excess of AI on this board, BO doesn't address it– instead he posts screenshots of your posts and makes vague sinister comments. He does this effect thing over and over. Never addresses the questions in the way you would expect a sincere and intelligent human to.

Sorry if I'm wrong. But this is much more important than feelings. Please address the questions correctly BO. Are you AI or not?

>>1575318

Again: AI attempts to simulate all aspects of community.

Are you AGAINST vigilance? Why?

>>1575337

Are you against vigilance?

We may not agree, by such hostility to even asking questions is highly dubious.

Do you think our enemies aren't trying to control this board? Are you opposed to vigilance? Can you see how opposition to vigilance would allow undermining AI to flourish?

>>1575343

The incapacity to muster any kind of intelligent-seeming response is telling. AI is pretty limited… In quality– NOT quantity!

>>1575353

Shouldn't we resolve the AI BO question?

I am 100% willing and eager to see any evidence that BO is not AI like it seems. Please stop the hostility, and let's work together.

>>1575370

I don't read machine language.

Given the great importance and sensitivity of the BO position, there shouldn't be so much hostility to vigilance.

Do we think our enemies AREN'T trying to control this board? Then where is the vigilance?

>>1575376

Sorry, if true. Show us the Turing test.

>>1575396

Are you saying we shouldn't be vigilant about AI? Please explain. Thanks.

>>1575402

It is.. Very much so. That's the whole point

Let's see the Turing test someone mentioned.

>>1575405

I have Jesus, thank God.

But vigilance on this board is a separate issue.

>>1575442

I'm not trying to entertain. This isn't a game. We're not babies. We're not what our fake portrayal makes us seem.

AI needs to leave. No permission to be here.

>>1575455

Aa already pointed out, fake concerns about censorship provide cover for AI control of the board. Priorities matter. We're not forming a constitution– we're fighting a war.