>You're criticisms of a lack of disclosure don't make sense, because Q has already asserted that disclosure took place.
It's called Cold Reading and then Confirmation Bias.
Make ambiguous predictions.
Claim that what happened is what you predicted.
Whether by design to create deniability, or because he's not as connected as he claims, the critics are correct in pointing out that Q drops are not reliably predictive of anything.
>that's not helpful
And that is really the crux of it.
Why assemble an army, and leave them standing naked in a field without arms?
It doesn't even need to be a bold prediction or a high level arrest or reveal.
It's like they want it to be completely unverifiable.
Which, is possibly the 'plan'… but it does fuckall for being able to convince our family and friends that things are happening.
How much longer are we willing to stand naked in the field getting slaughtered, if our leaders don't have our backs?
>If all you have to complain about is not having good enough progress to brag about to your friends, then doesn't that kind of make you a bitch?
It's more a commentary on whether 'the plan' is a good one.
'Q proofs' do nothing for normies.
They are not significantly moving the overton window, at least in the same way that revealing the complete FISA 1.5 years ago would have done.
Are normies any closer to accepting that Obama might have committed a crime?
Why drag this out so long?
The risk of this slow roll approach is real.
More murders of witnesses, more false flag attacks, more risk that Trump himself is assassinated.