>>19192427

>>19192439

>>19192549

>>19192553

>>19192554

(all PB)

>RRN

you know… it's past time for this to come to a head. BO/BV do NOT get to decide content (except to ban anything illegal, eg, CP).

that's NOT how a FREE SPEECH board is supposed to work. if an anon posts something from RRN, and other anons nom it for notables,

THEN IT GOES IN NOTABLES.

save the arguments about RRN being satire, or michael baxter's ALLEGED past (never seen any sauce on THAT), bcs it's IR-FUCKING-RELEVANT.

there have been DOZENS (if not hundreds) of notables about abiogenic oil, crypto, dark tech, and on and on and on, that are ALL certifiable BS.

so spare us the BULLSHIT about how the board will be somehow "discredited" if it includes RRN in notables.

YA WANNA KNOW WHAT "DISCREDITS" THIS BOARD??? CENSORSHIP DISCREDITS THIS BOARD, NOT RRN IN NOTABLES

anons can discern for themselves.

if it's posted and nommed, then in GOES IN NOTABLES. THAT'S how a free speech board works.

>>19193233

see the kind of bullshit you get from the self-anointed guardians of this place?

in this context, it mean Board Owner

>>19193270

you think that up all by yourself?

way to prove my point, jackass

>>19193238

>>19193234

>>19193238

>>19193270

>>19193285

>>19193288

>>19193292

SOOOOO much desperation to keep eyes off….

WHY IS THAT?

aksing for a fren….

>>19193321

it's NOT about the veracity of RRN,YOU FLAMING FUCKWIT

it's aboutCENSORSHIP

which has NO PLACE on a free speech board

come back when you can wrap your infantile brain around that

>>19193346

as i said, it's NOT about the veracity of RRN

that is entirely beside the point

it's about CENSORSHIP

RRN in notables could not possibly tarnish this board anywhere near its blanket censorship

got a cogent logical convincing rebuttal?

>>19193372

>it's being withheld from notables. no one is censoring

now THERE'S some Orwellian double think for ya….

>>19193378

>he dig was dug, the obvious was uncovered

POST IT

i DARE ya

post PROOF of the allegations about michael baxter

we'll wait

>>19193398

>how vaccines cause autism

it's NOT fucking autism

STOP calling it that

it's fucking BRAIN DAMAGE

start calling it what it is

maybe it will wake someone up

>>19193436

>It is not censorship to set standards for notables - such as decent sauce.

but it IS censorship when those standards are not applied equally. and they are NOT. wanna waste time mining qresear.ch for bullshit?

furthermore, the quantity of people telling the same unverified story does not constitute sauce, so the fact that RRN has original reports is not a valid argument.

>>19193428

the whooshing sound you may have noticed was THE POINT careening over your reverberating vacuous cranial cavity.

it's about CENSORSHIP, not about "truth in reporting."

wait here…. i'll go get a crayon so i can draw you a picture

>>19193457

lame ass deflection

you lazy retarded fuck

there were STORIES about an alleged interview with MB

the interview itself was NEVER posted

PROVE ME WRONG

>>19193519

you're entitled to your opinion

will you extend the same courtesy to others who disagree?

or are you a fascist censor?

have a nice day :O)

>>19193518

>we took a vote

>rrn is out

NOT HOW A FREE SPEECH BOARD OPERATES

>>19193527

thx for the home movies of yourself, but no one cares

>>19193531

>Why are you so insistent upon posting it here?

i'm NOT.

i don't post RRN here

i OBJECTING to CENSORSHIP

reading comprehension much?

jackass

>>19193534

>you sound vaxxed

really?

the majority are vaxxed, and you're using "a vote" as an argument

LOGIC MUCH?

>>19193544

LOL…. way to step in shit and come out smelling like SHIT

>>19193549

>How many times in the last year have you considered suicide?

mine? or yours?

>>19193555

> wisdom is knowledge through discernment

information is not knowledge

knowledge is not understanding

understanding is not insight

insight is not wisdom

wisdom is not goodness

goodness is not compassion

compassion is not love

love…

is divine

>>19193565

where is the SAUCE?

where is a link to POLITICO containing the article?

where is a link to a vid of the interview with the conveniently masked and unidentifiable man?

and (You) have the BALLS to call RRN F&G?

>>19193576

the nail in the coffin for your intelligence is more like it

>>19193587

>I don't understand the obsession tonight with objecting to the removal of propaganda

the "objection" is that neither you nor anyone else here can post incontrovertible proof that it IS fake, anymore than anyone can prove it's true.

>>19193599

ffs… you're the one who wants to ban RRN for lack of those things

shall we ban YOU for objecting to RRN without irrefutable proof that it's fake?

>>19193601

NOT PROOF

do you even comprehend what "PROOF" means?

>>19193611

>By your definition, any kind of content guideline would be censorship.

WOW…. you FINALLY fucking GET IT!

>>19193616

POST A VID OF HIM SAYING IT

otherwise it's HEARSAY

do you KNOW what HEARSAY IS?

>>19193634

>The sauce has been posted.

thx for outing yourself as a retard/shill

>>19193646

>guidelines here for notables

"guidelines" for notable IS censorship

what fucking part of that is your pea brain unable to process?

what's the worst that could happen if RRN was in notable?

maybe a lurker who never heard of RRN reads it and says, "oh wow… i SAW that. i saw exactly what was described in the story."

are you AFRAID of corroboration from an eye-witness?

sure seems like it…

>>19193676

you're comfy with censorship, and you tell those who are not to leave.

you glow so bright they can see you from the ISS.

>>19193673

i give as i get

>>19193708

where is you "sensible" rebuttal to

>>19193675

don't got nuttin'?

>>19193733

>How come Mira the Pleiadian can post at will without meeting the TOGTFO requirement?

doesn't come from RRN?

>>19193706

>We took a vote, NEVER NOTABLE RRN

NOT HOW FREE SPEECH WORKS

was it ok when twitter "voted" to ban what it didn't like?

was it ok when facebook "voted" to ban what it didn't like?

go bum a quarter and buy yourself a fucking dictionary and look up HYPOCRITE

>>19193764

THEY DON'T GET A FUCKING VOTE

was it ok when karens got people kicked off YT?

was it ok when karens got people kicked off twitter?

was it ok when karens got people kicked off

[soc med of your choice]?

how do you even know who these anons were?

were they fedbois?

were they bots?

STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOR CENSORSHIP

(You) are the one destroying what little cred this board still has

>>19193780

you can run away

but you can't hide your censorship

8kun is officially comped

>>19193812

it's NOT up for a vote, retard.

STILL WAITING FOR A LOGICAL ARGUMENT AGAINST

what's the worst that could happen if RRN was in notables?

maybe a lurker who never heard of RRN reads it and says, "oh wow… i SAW that. i saw exactly what was described in the story."

are you AFRAID of corroboration from an eye-witness?

sure seems like it…

>>19193826

if you'd stop reee-ing you might be able to hear others

>>19193819

i have done that, and met the same bullshit here

i've asked planefags if they can corroborate

i've asked people in specific locations if they can corroborate

get the same tsunami of haters EVERY FUCKING TIME

kinda makes ya wonder, donit?

>>19193840

>That is you, that is quote.

i never posted that

that's

>(You)

trying to put YOUR 'words' in my mouth

do (You) understand what 'quote' means?

>>19193850

that's NOT an argument against RRN in notables

like i pointed out

putting it in notable MIGHT lead to independent corroboration

leaving it out won't. leaving it out is a way to make sure it can't happen here.

>>19193855

>kun Tainted with known malicious liars.

how is that worse than tainting kun withCENSORSHIP???

aksing for a fren….

>>19193853

>You can't provide ANY argument FOR it

I'M not the one who NEEDS to provide an argument, but i did anyway…

IT'S A FREE SPEECH BOARD, YOU GLOWING COMMIE BASTARD

if it's posted and nommed, IT GOES IN NOTABLES

that's the ONLY rule of free speech

>>19193871

>Do you work for RRN?

do you work for MSNBC?

>>19193854

>No, that is me mocking your pathetic whiny arguments.

so then NOT A QUOTE

got it

first honest thing you're posted

>>19193889

>So who are you working for then?

actually i'm retired. for 10yrs now.

>will the house of cards you've built crumble around you if you do?

i'm here out of a sense of patriotism and a love of truth

WHY ARE (YOU) HERE? Got the balls to answer that?

>>19193889

>Asking me a question that you know is false

for all any of us know you're rachel fucking madcow

>>19193919

>I don't believe you.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

that's rich

>You are a paid poster

if only….

>there's no doubt that

feel sorry for an innocent anon with you on the jury.

pro tip: get a dictionary and a book on logic.

>>19193925

confirmed

https://spaceweather.com/archive.php?view=1&day=16&month=07&year=2023

>>19193956

>Do you feel

feelz are for cows