dChan
Anonymous ID: ac9508 July 30, 2018, 9:30 p.m. No.2366471   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6533

>>2366428

Sorry, didn't see these, was replying to lb.

>>2366423, >>2366430

Ty bakers

 

Was responding to prev:

>>2366299 lb

> you have my damn twitter and IG. if you have something to say, say it to me privately instead of wasting time and bread and screwing with anons’ trust

With respect, what I had to say I had to say for anons' sake, not yours. I have no interest in private comms with you or anyone respecting our mission here. All I did was point out your past posts on the board, which is the kind of discernment we all use here when deciding how much faith to put in an anons' current claims. Your current claim is that you are a baker to be trusted, I thought anons should know that you have also advocated positions which are stock-behaviors that are anti-chan.

 

I won't say more on this bc I don't want drama, or a slide. I'm just clarifying my position since it was questioned b4 anons. Anons trust or don't trust on their own, no one tells them what to think. They base their analysis on DATA. When it comes to anons/bakers/mods, that data is work product and post history re: position advocacy, honesty/integrity etc. They have your data, they have mine, it’s up to anons what to do with it, not me or you.

TY for your passion, Godspeed baker.

Anonymous ID: ac9508 July 30, 2018, 9:53 p.m. No.2366841   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6893

>>2366661

>>2366393

Good stuff, thanks for the transcriptions, anon.

Content-wise, yes, great for resources.

 

The only issue I have is with format. Don't pastebin URL's expire? Don't know enough about the history of using pastebin URL's as resources to weigh in with any certainty.

 

Could anon repost each of these to current bread and then we just put links/descrip's in resources?