>>2400506 oh? not sure i'm who you think i am, if that's what you meant, but how would i know?

there are some anons i recognize from their style, posting patterns and methods, etc…

i've found this to be a fascinating aspect of this odd unsocial-network we're on/inventing, where despite the anonymity, we do spot some anons in the big family - sometimes obvious, but often less so, and it's a gut feeling, so never quite sure, but…

anyway. love ya too, but i'm feeling emotional because i've been away from the boards for so long… burned out, checked once in a while that there were still Q posts but didn't dig in… then i come back here and it feels like quite the momentum shift… so glad to be back, and so glad and grateful to see the place running so crazily yet smoothly… on one part, it's also a very liberating feeling to have let go and come back and see that it's ok, this is bigger than all of us now, and, well, it's ALIVE… if any anon reading this feels drawn out but feels guilty to step back, don't. it's ok. It feels great to enjoy the show, too…

>>2400704

holyhell, going mainstream and it's THEM saying it

>>2400765

>>2400753

they're pretty low-key.

could be clearer on what they are but the date is there, so minimal effort.

overall you really have to do too much for Q crumbs to be spam.

i don't think these are.

it's a tactic among others, can help some newfags (and olds) re-reading crumbs.

personnally i prefer when there's a specific point being made, or link to something current, etc, but Q drops can't hurt. Unrelated can click certain other ideas, too, etc.

>>2400737

that's a shame, there was also a cap mp4 posted - two of them, i think. They should be in the time-related breads (this pm), not sure which those would be.