<not all clowns glow
<not all anons are "anons"
>>295055 <last thread
hashtags are for tweets, not on memes.
do we really need to explain?
On twitter a # is clickable.
On a picture it isn't.
baker
can you bake this out too?
>(pointed out by >>274871 )
<not part of reply chain
<we know what 666 is about, Q even gives context in his post, not necessary
they're just going with the "keep lying" strategy, against all odds/logic. They're all in.
It will break
anons screaming constantly at shills and doing little else are the WORST shills around. Seriously.
I know most of them aren't actually "shills".
still the worst.
yup, this.
much potential for fuckery, this has. very little positive, many disadvantages (discrediting the actual marker system, dividing anons over non-issue, general confusion)…
respectfully, please stop trying to impose this.
extrapolation of actual confirmed marker system not relevant to actual Q drops/content/mission.
(don't care what you believe as long as you don't disrupt. Insisting on this = disrupting.)
1/2 comments on halfchan were screaming LARP.
then the bakers got way into swastikas.
then Q's trip/opsec was compromised.
can't we just send the newfags/concernfags to their feelz thread or something? it happens about every other hour…
>The problem isn't letting anons concernfag.
>
>It's that other anons can't resist replying to it 20 times and giving it attention.
>
>If you don't like it, ignore it.
<trudat