>>2042439
>If you don't believe me, just try to have a discussion that even slightly goes against the grain here, you will get hit with programmed calls of HERETIC (shill).
>>2042456
>You have no analytics for your claims, shill.
This bot's irony detection module is acting up again.
The worst thing that ever happened to Q was all the low IQ boomers and kids like this one that joined.
Happened back in January and the board has been 1/10th of it's former self ever since.
Which is why I continue to say that the only legitimate reason for that post was to demonstrate this to us, so we would realize that the same method could be used to skirt around NAT SEC laws and leak damning photos or video.
Imagine watching Hillary eat a baby in the reflection on the side of a tea kettle.
It would demand being addressed, but wouldn't technically be leaking the source.
If it were of decent enough fidelity, it would create a demand for answers of it is was legitimate, and to release the source if it was.
It wouldn't be used as primary proof, but as a way to inject the idea in the public without actually breaking a law.
Mirrors are made to be perfectly flat to give a perfect reflection.
Phones are not.
Taking a phone with an imperfect reflective surface, then holding it at an angle, then taking a picture of that reflection will sufficiently transform an image to the point of being unable to perfectly match the source any longer.
In other words, there is literally no way to know if it is a picture of a stock photo online, or a picture of the real thing.
For this reason, it is useless as any sort of proof.
qproofs.com is full of garbage invalid proofs, and is missing most of the legitimate ones.
For instance, they include proofs that use the POTUS_Schedule twitter account, which is not official and is run by an anon.
Is anyone actively moderating that anymore?
I liked the idea, but it is completely defeating the purpose if it is full of junk.
It is also important because Q came here knowing this is how we would approach the information, and often plants a "disprovable" drop, only to immediately add more context or a spin on it as soon as we "disprove" it.
If we lost all skepticism and logic and just turn into a fucking fan page, then we have hamstrung Q's methods of communication, and the entire thing that made us useful as a group in the first place.
Do you think people who scream shill and shut down any skeptical discussion of any points are trying to help our research, or hurt it?
Autists are defined by the ability (or curse) of not being emotionally attached to ideas. This allows us to dig and dive into theories without stepping in the quick sand that is having ego stakes in our ideas (i.e. famefags).
Once all the normies started joining the boards, they put an end to that. They get so emotionally attached to ideas that they react violently whenever those ideas are pushed.
Even if that idea is something like an initial interpretation of a Q drop.
It won't matter if an anon is suggesting something that invalidates that interpretation, but opens up a more interesting and useful way to look at the drop, while still believing Q is legit.
They will just yell "kys shill" and talk about clowns and filter the board until it goes back to an echo chamber facebook group they can log into and emotionally recharge every day.
Again you reply with generic insults "shill shill!" without even comprehending the content of the post.
I wasn't calling Q a cult, because that would make me a member.
I said many people are engaging with this as a religious cult-like level, which isn't helpful but is inevitable.
If you're too stupid to follow what I'm saying just let me know and I'll stop wasting my time.
It's entirely possible Q fired off a pic but didn't really mean for it to be used as some ironclad proof of credibility.
It's not even close to the same thing, and the fact that you were confident enough that it was to post it in a comment reveals your lack of comprehension.
Anons didn't parse anything.
It is a picture of an imperfect reflection on an angled phone.
This distorts the image to the point where it can't be matched with the original, even if it was a pic of the stock photo.
It also could be an original photo of the actual office.
With the reflection being the middle man, it makes it impossible to determine.
It is actually UNKNOWABLE if this is legitimate or not.
Again, the fact that you can't draw this distinction is revealing the limits of your intelligence.
It's actually hilarious that you are trying to make the point that implying people may interface with an movement in emotionally-driven or irrational ways somehow denigrates the entire movement and all of it's members.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the movement, it is entirely about how individuals engage with ideas.
I'm almost to the point where I can't believe you are so stupid that you can't understand this, and so you must be a shill yourself.
If you aren't a shill then you are retarded.
It's always cute when our low-IQ normie members respond to posts they can't understand are actually pro-Q and pro-/qresearch/ so they scream shills at it anyways.
Love you guys, keep on keepin on you wonderful dumb bastards.