>>1591058 <<
>Jillions of responses. Not all great, but many really good!
to what (post)?
kek, hello evening shift
the sauce is actually VICE mag as we can see, but DAYUM
>>1591259 woah thanks
baker
please add to this section:
QPosts Archives in All Formats
-
Spreadsheet Q&A and all images backup: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Efm2AcuMJ7whuuB6T7ouOIwrE_9S-1vDJLAXIVPZU2g/
-
Spreadsheet Timestamps/Deltas: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OqTR0hPipmL9NE4u_JAzBiWXov3YYOIZIw6nPe3t4wo/
>>1591588 thanks for the update, i guess. happened to around to catch it and the capture fit perfectly, so there you go…
no definite/fixed opinion on helperanons yet, i found many to be obviously misleading, but we do know there's all sorts of comms here (and sometimes anonymous posts from a particular IP), but this selection was at least pretty interesting…
also been very curious about Antarctica lately…
>>1591645 gold
>>1591629 THANKYOU, most excellent summary, my thoughts exactly but better formulated/formatted
>Q did promise >We will help so I'll take that.
>some posts stand out w/ genuine light yet w/o glowing
True. Also, it would make sense there would be ops to discredit such crucial drops of info: the first big wave of helperanon prop that melded the idea with unclear deltas to unclear posts smelled awful… but as i've hinted/said, the trip change and data provided by admins provided a whole other level of confirmation to the concept, but it's kept as an open secret, basically.
The thing is, we just need to find the proper balance of attention to info without focusing on the said helperanons: focusing on certain IDs can and will always easily be derailed and slid in many predictable ways. It also goes with "do not glorify us" and is just basic sense since, help coming anonymously, should be kept thus. But if we're missing some drops, it's good that some anons have a flair to spot them…