well
time to fire up the community META
than you OP anon
this is FUCKING ridiculous
no words
shut it down, the made for TV movie
well
time to fire up the community META
than you OP anon
this is FUCKING ridiculous
no words
shut it down, the made for TV movie
>time to fire up the community META
apparenty admin META is closed again
>>16276667 (nice trips)
seems permanent this time
I will respond to BO's posts here
>>16271733
>link to ban board was restored within hours - check the ribbon.
5:5
>you have me as saying mod.php is "pretty broken."
>Do not recall that
see: >>16255836
>mod.php is in fact quite broken.
not you?
>nor saying anything about there being no replacement for cmz. Link?
see: >>16255952
>[is there an actual replacement for Ron that knows how to code the site?]
>It doesn't seem so.
>I can code, but I'm not experienced in php. I'm doing other things for /qr/ though.
not you?
>JW accepts either checks or bitcoin
I dont doubt it
>>16272117
>It's actually 1 MINUTE bans.
5:5
I stand corrected
>And that is actually happening right now.
all BV's are now following this protocol?
>screencap
>Doesn't prove anything.
its something
its easily do-able without coding a solution
>[too much effort to expect from volunteer moderators]
>No, it's actually a waste of time.
>Screenshots without an archive
the post number is in the screenshot
the post number is in the board log
the board log is archived
am missing something here?
>A ban archive can also get attacked
which is a reason to not have one?
I dont get it
>Look into /tech/
>Nothing fixed.
proving my point
>And you complain non stop.
no
I have two very basic concerns
-deletions should be reserved for cases of actual illegal content (US Code)
-what is going to be done about the B post on /projectdcomms/?
thats it
>>16272182
>mod.php is in fact pretty broken
>You can check all of these claims by yourself, but I doubt you will.
I'll take your word on it
>Got genuine concerns? Email BO at F4AL@protonmail.com.
hard pass
>Baker BV Gerbil gets caught thanking himself, splits bread, blames the ghost of OSS
weird shit in the catalog
right now
#20632 is ~725 posts
there are 2 locked #20633's
and there is no "open" #20633 fresh bread
interesting
will keep invetigating
I wonder when the locked #20633's got baked?
were they way early or somethingโฆ?
>were they way early or somethingโฆ?
one was baked a bit early
~20 minutes before post 650
the other one was baked right at 650 posts in the current bread
so like
pretty good timing
wonder why it got locked
>wonder why it got locked
ohhh
because BV's are baking
and BV realized they baked early?
>>16310473 (other bread)
>this thread is locked until previous is filled, will then unlock.
mystery solved
now they lock the only open bread in the catalog with no fresh bake to post in?
wow
this is epic
>now they lock the only open bread in the catalog with no fresh bake to post in?
>"crickets!"
actually
โฆ
there were 4 anons that replyed with willingness to bake
BO responded to exactly 0 of them
>>16310829 (PB)
>4 anon show interest in baking as offered by BO
>no response from BO
>top
>fucking
>kek
>CNN would be shouting it every ten minutes, anything to put Orange Man before the sheep
CNN run hit pieces on POTUS and the chans without -ANY- reference sited
the number of "Qanon" hit pieces that actually site an actual post are less than 1%
your argument is fake and ghey
and you know it is fake and ghey
>this "conversation"
>I'd say it's all to set up both PDJT and Q Research
>with the bonus of throwing shade on bakers, BVs, and BO
you are doing that well enough all by yourself "anon"
>PDJT never ReTruthed that part
he ReTruthed a comment in the reply chain
how the fuck did PDJT know the context of the reply he was ReTruthing if he never checked the OP?
are we arguing PDJT is literally retarded and doesn't know how to use his own app now?
for fucks sake
the mental gymnastics olympics going on here
>Qaqq added what was in the thread
because its a threaded conversation
the comments are threaded together because they are relevent to each-other in the context of being within the same reply chain
how is the OP post of a reply chain considered to be "not relevent" to the preceeding conversation?
wtf is pepe drinking