>>1933495

dear BAKER, I'm not sure why you added this to my notables collection.

I think if you look closely at it you'll find it is a graph without labels that give it meaning. It doesn't say what it is and the whole post lacks sauce of any kind

I know it was rushed, and thanQ for baking but please look over any additions or deletions to another bakers notables very carefully.

you have no idea who gave you that list

remember, trust but verify

besides it reeks of… muh habbenig!!

>#2434

>>1931389 - Timewave habbening 4th July

>>1934121

that is the only thing I see that need editing

I saw your hesitation in the prior bread

and in the future I'm sure you'll look anon submissions over much more carefully

I personally think it's better to omit a questionable notable than include it

better safe than sorry

THANQ for your service and the great quality of your bakes.

>>1934152

no worries anon!

we all make errors

it only becomes a mistake when you fail to admit / correct