Anonymous ID: 31c108 Jan. 29, 2018, 5:55 a.m. No.199664   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9691

>>199561

I immediately zeroed into this one

2017-10-30 00:34:36 -0400 QPost Now think about the timing of POTUS traveling to China/SK. I’ve said too much. God bless, Patriots.

 

Not Q.

Anonymous ID: 31c108 Jan. 29, 2018, 6:09 a.m. No.199739   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>199641

fuck off

2017-10-30 00:34:36 -0400 QPost Now think about the timing of POTUS traveling to China/SK. I’ve said too much. God bless, Patriots.

Anonymous ID: 31c108 Jan. 29, 2018, 6:28 a.m. No.199855   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9881

>>199691

Ok I see what you are saying about that post now, and understand why you included it.

Just looking at the spreadsheet - the QT diff is not intuitive. Is the consensus that the delta is to be a difference in timing from the Q post? Or does the delta also include tweet to tweet? I'm not clear on when time = 0 for subsequent posts.

Anonymous ID: 31c108 Jan. 29, 2018, 6:50 a.m. No.199957   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9970

>>199881

No the concept will greatly simplify looking for markers. Looking at it more closely it looks like the deltas are expressed in minutes from the most recent Q post but I guess I am thinking linearly and the deltas "should" range from 0 to end value and only increase to the end. I see both positive and negative values and I can't interpret where time 0 is.

 

I hate to complicate matters for you, but each Q post within a day can potentially serve as time 0. If that is the case, it might be necessary to include as many columns for deltas using each Q post within a day as a potential starting point.

 

I don't know if all that is too much or even makes sense to you.