Q's private board
/projectdcomms/
violated by global volunteer over a year ago
and the post still stands
shameful
>So you support deleting posts from boards?
from Q's private board?
who creation was dictated by Q
for Q to use
solely
for a very specific purpose?
YES
I support DELETING any posts on that board that dont come directly from Q's tripcode/ ip hash
100%
any anon that doesnt deserves the next post from Q
which is going to be some version of picrel
>it's Q's board. It's not my decision to make, neither is it Jims, neither is it yours.
Q already made the decision
>False
Q:
"Formation of'clean' boardpossible to lock in trip(s) issues w/ safeguards."
'clean' board
violated by rouge BV post is not 'clean'
RECONCILE
>It's Q's board. Not mine, not yours.
>Not B's either
ergo
rouge BV post should be deleted
think logically
>But let's go with your narrative and Q actually logged in since then and decided.
Q decided the board would be a 'clean' private board onNov 21 2019 22:18:33 (EST)
the DECISION has already been made
it is a 'clean' private board for Q
as per Q's DIRECT request
>B post: 29th of May 2021
yep, AFTER Q instructed the board reated as a 'clean' private board
ergo
logically
it should be deleted
as it is a violation of the 'clean' directive from Q
>because you assume
not an assumtion
a clearly stated directive from Q
'clean' private board
it has been violated by rouge global volunteer
Q has left previos boards /cbts/ as an example for EXACTLY this kind of fuckery
ergo
it SHOULD be corrected before Qhasto do something about it
>The point as given by Q was to lock in trips
thats not even considering the full sentence of context
>Formation of 'clean' board possible to lock in trip(s) > issues w/ safeguards.
lock in trip(s)
and
issues w/safeguards
safeguards
like keeping a 'clean' private board
clean and private
>So why did Q write 'clean' and not clean?
obviously because Q intended for a rouge BV to post on the board
>The B post was surely not a "mistake"
a rouge global volunteer violating Q's private board by posting on it was surely a mistake
as it violates the privacy of Q's board
by definition
already defined clean
/facepalm
we would be nothing without the grammarcat
cant even blame Otto Korrekt for that one
>Define mistake
I already did
>by definition
an action or judgment that is misguided or wrong.
>Do you know that Q knows about the "B" post? Maybe Q doesn't.
its been over a year
Q knew about the post as it happened
>It's not a mistake if it was planned in advance.
Ohh I know it was pre-planned
I am claiming it was "misguided" and "wrong"
to have done so
>He just wrote that post and wanted to post it somewhere else?
no, that is not what I am implying;
to be very direct
mistake; defined:
an action or judgment that is misguided or wrong.
I am making the claim that the post was "misguided" and "wrong"
and that MISTAKE should be corrected by deleting the post
Yes
it was intentional
it was wrong to do it
it was (most likely) done for personal gain
which I am arguing is misguided
Jim leaving the post there is clearly a fucking mistake as well
>The proper move by Jim back then was to remove the post and state publicly here that safeguards were put in place (as they should have remained all along) to never allow that to happen again.
this
thats like saying you cant pull the knige out of a stabbing victims back because its evidence that they got stabbed
or
with fewer words
its fucking retarded
>No victim here bleeding to death
qr and 8kun as a whole is ABSOLUTELY bleeding out
anon engagement/ participation is on a steadily downward spiral
3 hour bread average is now 3.5
4 hour bread average on the way
>3 posts so far, all obnoxious in different ways.
your a fucking nigger
I hope you know that
your the nigger that said nothing was bleeding
>Bread duration is irrelevant
enagement/ participation/ userbase is absolutely relevant
if your not growing you are dying
>Thanking you for helping increase paricipation, topkek
the fact that a full bread long "slide" about an issue that should have been resolved a year ago represents over 20% of the posts in this bread is not a sign of "good" board health anon
>now up to 37
and this is still going to be a 3 hour bread
now erase all my posts and every one else commenting
there at least 37 posts from the anon(s) I am replying too
at least 100 posts by now on this subject
damn
this place is worse off than I thought
>If the IP hopping here is any indication, then that UID count is guaranteed inflated.
but there is NO IP hoping on qresearch that would artificially inflate numbers….
ffs
>Engagement & PPM have dropped 10x
>Meaningless.
nah
a drop that significant has meaning
I literally died keking when I read that little piece of 'logic'
I should CAP it, print it, and frame it for memories sake
yeah
Q just hasen't noticed it yet
>remember that one time in nicaragua….