Anonymous ID: 0fa900 March 2, 2022, 12:43 p.m. No.15765184   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>5187 >>6120 >>8915

>>15765023

in the past, BO simply made decisions

Didn't like it? Too bad - and that was that.

 

There is more discussion now, all sincere opinions are welcome.

But some anons are more vocal than others - simply posting more does not give your opinion more weight

As BO, try to take into acct the silent opinions unexpressed but still there

 

With due respect, you have not been here for a long time

I have - we have.

The bakers and anons that hung in over the last year plus, despite grossly deteriorating conditions. Glad to have returning anons and bakers, as well. Just please give some thought for those who remained.

 

Time will tell what works and what doesn't.

I am a patient man - willing to watch and wait.

Hope you are as well.

o7

Anonymous ID: 0fa900 March 3, 2022, 12:17 a.m. No.15770264   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>0988 >>1484 >>1526 >>1889

This is a new thread for META.

New beginning.

All anons arewelcome as long as they respect other posters and want to discuss board stuff. Started getting shilly last bread. One baker said, let's make the next thread different. I agree.

 

The following users are not welcome on META, all subsequent posts will be deleted -

deca85, 1af180

 

Next up - ae4455, cd30dd

This ain't a notables board and you don't really seem like diggers. Keep it up and you're out.

Anonymous ID: 0fa900 March 3, 2022, 12:03 p.m. No.15773894   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>3989 >>5149

>>15771889

not sure what that particular deletion is about, so cannot respond

 

re CHAOS -

there was maximum chaos when oss was active and fj let that happen. It is much less chaotic now because of restoration of global announcements, standardized notable formatting, use of handoff protocols, cleaner catalog, and deletion of illegal spam from main board and side boards (pedo bear) - so we don't get deplatformed for "harboring" such content.

 

DOAR and later HM/OSS have been attacking this board. The Q is: how to deal with those attacks?

 

If anyone had dared posted their entire notables from another board in QR as spam, OSS would have done a PERMABAN in a second. He permabanned at least 1000 anons for NO REASON. Anons had NO WAY to appeal those bans with 8kun admin. Now they do.

 

When a hostile group (often but not always OSS) posts attack messages as spam, should admins sit back and allow it? Is that what anons really want? It is certainly an option. But is it the best option?

 

Spam is not free speech. Have no problems deleting it. But only to the extent it is wanted by anons as a whole.

 

However, most anons are silent - do not reeeee much about anything. Just do the work.

Shills are loud, always complaining. Not seeking solutions.

There are also anons who speak up with legit concerns - those are the voices that should be heard. Even so, they may or may not represent most anons (who tend to say their piece when the louder voices are quiet).

 

Admins are trying to find the balance between too much deleting/banning and none at all.

Previously, the spam posted was by those who had nothing to do with QR (muh masons, muh joos, others). Mostly ignored by admins, who also ignored requests for catalog cleanup, renumbering of breads, and locking of dup baker.

Much of the current spam is from OSS and minions. Completely new scenario.

There have been many other Q boards besides this one - HM is the only board that has ever done a full frontal attack on Q Research. Before that, FJ and OSS was hostile to 8kun admin - FJ doxxed JW convo a long time ago. They are a generally hostile group who never cleaned up QR.

 

So we are listening to the feedback and are seeking CONSTRUCTIVE solutions.I have outlined the problem above.

IMO, letting chaos reign (completely) will not work. OSS showed us that. Discovering the balance between chaos and order is where we are at.

Right now, board admins have backed off completely - just watching. Still deleting illegal content but not much else. Where do we go from here?

 

There is no policy written in stone at this point, just efforts to deal with a new kind of problem. Appreciate your concern and that of other anons genuinely seeking solutions.

 

Thoughts?

Anonymous ID: 0fa900 March 3, 2022, 3:21 p.m. No.15775228   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>15773989

>They are a generally hostile group who never cleaned up QR.

>being nice has never been a requirement on /qresearch/

key phrase is "never cleaned up QR."

Meaning hostile to the purpose of this board.

Uncooperative, unresponsive to anons while claiming to speak up for them. "hostile" in giving anons permabans and not locking breads, etc.

 

> "raids of conquest" were conducted against the /qresearch/ board from the boards I listed above

sauce it (real sauce - not OSS claims)

 

>>15774028

you are making claims you cannot prove against other Q boards. If you have sauce, produce it.

 

Easy to show what HM is trying to do - see what they write on their own board and what they post here - their spam notables, ads for HM, muh joos spam & attacks on admins, including 8kun admins. We get this space for free, 8kun admins protect it from continuous daily - not periodic - attacks. Wo/that protection, 8kun would have been TOAST long ago.

Anonymous ID: 0fa900 March 3, 2022, 6:55 p.m. No.15776908   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>7854 >>7908

>>15775703

what is this supposed to show? no bread number, date, context, nothing. Don't know who is making the post, who the posters referred to are, and how the remarks referred to by the poster are supposed to add up to a bomb threat. i'm guessing this is from OSS, since that's his usual approach - juxtapose a bunch of remarks and then tell you what to think about them.

 

>>15775824

what is this? again, no context. the only thing i see is "dough was changed without notice or discussion by unresponsive baker". looks like the unresponsive baker was OSS. Can't read anything else, it's too small.

 

Most anons on this board are doing dig-meme-pray stuff most of the time, some are noting and baking as well. mebbe you're baking, i don't know.

 

Not interested in halfbaked theories with crap sauce that wouldn't make notables in generals. Focused on the future - how we can make this board work. Not dissect it.

 

Hope you want that too. Said i was patient and i am. But don't have time to go thru stuff that has been posted b4 by OSS - how many times? There is too much to do. Up to you what you want to do. Either help us win the fight or find another place to make a contribution.

Anonymous ID: 0fa900 March 3, 2022, 7:26 p.m. No.15777179   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>7459

>>15775528

Accidentally included you in post encouraging no division fagging. But i hope you are able to receive that message as well. Because setting aside our differences is the only way we'll be able to defeat the enemy that deserves all our attention right now.

o7

Anonymous ID: 0fa900 March 4, 2022, 12:48 a.m. No.15779055   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>15778121

>>15778125

>>15778219

>>15778292

>>15778335

>>15778383

>>15778401

>>15778407

014e6f is right right. It's a warzone. GTFO and don't come back.

Here's your posts in case you forgot what you said.

Anonymous ID: 0fa900 March 4, 2022, 11:52 a.m. No.15782333   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>2344 >>2881 >>2888 >>3675

>>15782138

please refresh

 

OSS is the baker who is banned, both from baking and posting due to repeated efforts to subvert the board.

 

Other baker is daily baker trying to protect the board bc it has been under attack. Earlier today, some baker posted incomplete dough that had to be reconstructed. When irresponsible or shill bakers are in charge, bakers or admins have to repair the damage.

 

The question is: What is the best way to protect the work while at the same time being as open as possible to bakers?

 

Admins cannot be here 24/7 to "vet" bakers. And if they were, it would not work for occasional bakers. We appreciate all bakers. Sorry you had a bad experience but it is not personal.

 

Thoughts?