Reposting for dayshift:

If anons want to go on a trip down memory lane and refresh their conviction in Q, I will be posting and explaining Q proofs every day here:

https://www.frenschan.org/qresearch/res/17.html

Aiming to do 1 month's worth of proofs per day.

Also, update: Frens Chan now hashes IPs.

Mods, including site admin, can no longer see IP addresses of their users. Full details here:

https://www.frenschan.org/fc/res/2493.html

As a reminder, I created /qresearch/ on Frens Chan as a backup board in case 8kun goes down, and also to provide Q with a place to verify themselves in case 8kun is compromised. Explanation here: https://www.frenschan.org/qresearch/res/11.html#q13

I'll be around ITT if anyone has questions.

o7

>>16782002

For anyone who doesn't know: Frens Chan is basically a 4chan clone, without the degeneracy. Unlike 4chan, they allow VPNs. Culture-wise, it's less of a free-for-all as they actively delete porn, tranny shit, and other degenerate cancer that regularly infests 4chan and degrades the quality of the site.

It's only been up for about 4 months so it doesn't have all of the features we're used to here but it's close enough and the admins are very responsive and hands-on.

I'm planning on using the Q proof thread as a one-stop-shop link for redpilling about the legitimacy of Q, since the Q proof thread here is unorganized and the book of Q proofs hasn't been updated in years.

>>16782037 FYI "no outside comms" came about because there were shills like Jerome Corsi (iirc) who claimed to be communicating with Q privately - on Ann Vandersteel's show ("Q told me this").

Q has moved sites before and boards within the same site. 4ch /pol/ 8ch /cbts/ /ga/ > /qresearch/

Leaving a compromised site ≠ "outside comms"

o7

>>16782096

I'm not a site admin, it's not my rule. Admins told me they'd be fine with baker bewbs as long as it's spoilered. IMO porn is not free speech.

>>16782108

Yea, just like 8chan groomed the Christchurch shooter and 4chan grooms every other shooter….

/s in case that's not obvious.

Frens Chan doesn't permit fedposting.

The ban permanently for this:

Fed posting (including but not limited to: calls for violence, murder, self-harm, illegal activities, etc.)

>>16782121

they*

also link to rules here:

https://www.frenschan.org/rules.html

rule #4 is no fedposting

>Users that break rules #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10 or #11 will be banned permanently

>>16782126

Alright cool

>>16782124

Good thing everyone can think for themselves and make their own decisions.

>>16782135

This was not posted on Frens Chan. The /qresearch/ board there was only created about 3 weeks ago..

>>16782138

Yes, even newfags.

>>16782143

I agree re: censorship in theory. In practice, it's not so clear-cut. 4chan jannies delete useful information all the time, and yet allow posts about trannies and whores to spam the catalog on a daily basis. Board staff here have also deleted content they disagree with, regularly. Truth Social also censors content behind sensitive labels if I'm not mistaken. There's a difference between deleting porn and fedposting (calls for violence) and censorship. I don't think that word means what you think it means..

>>16782174

I think it's a matter of opinion: lawlessness vs. chaos.

Out in the real world, there are laws for a reason. They preserve the moral fabric of our society. I didn't create Frens Chan, but I can understand their goal to create a community that's free from trannies and degenerate content - hence their rules. There are plenty of places on the internet for that shit. It's kind of like walking into someone's home and flinging shit on their cupboards. It's not illegal per se but you wouldn't do it based on social norms. Basically, it's not a matter of censorship, but just a different site culture. Still right-wing, still red-pilled, but less degeneracy. That's all. How shit used to be before leftists infested every area of our society.