>Spammer?

Never heard of him.

>Proto?

Never heard of it.

>>17863607

Who else could it B then?

>>17863673

>how about a verification

Exactly.

• TC not changed in 3 years - not OG Q's style of opsec and much moar easily crackable now

• Q's very stale TC didn't change after the 06/2022 Salt Rotation incident - technically not possible unless…

• It was hardcoded or CM did something in the code which was NOT comm'd via the board

• Also not OG Q like compared to prev onboard public comms between the 2

• Totally not the same style of drops OG used - definitely not the same author

• At the very least would be a diff <10 composing them if even really them in the first place

Doubtfags are legit in questioning and only a mathematically impossible to deny verification process can prove them wrong.

OG Q never had an issue before with removing any and all doubts of legitimacy.

Very very dasting that it's suddenly a no can do in 2022 after a long absence.

>>17863720

> unless of course it's Jim himself

As of now that's moar likely than it being real Q.

Verification is the only way to resolve the very valid fact based arguments that were just presented.

>>17863782

Lotsa coincidences back then.

Not so many so far in 2022.

Need moar coincidences (aka mathematically impossible to deny verification) again to prove that the TC hasn't been cracked after 3 years (totally possible) or even worse that it's inside job fuckery taking place.

>>17863853

Concur.

Tippy Top was a yuge sensation when it occurred.

Even compd af Twitter back then couldn't stop it from spreading like wildfire.

They did stop it from trending real fast tho.

>>17863892

Because square pegs don't fit into round holes.

And including them would ruin that whole decode.

But, mostly the square pegs thing.