>>3449717 (LB)
Why do you care about credibility?
Anons have no credibility.
You went around trying to predict the future and were proven wrong?
Here's a tip. Nothing is real until it happens. Believe what you will, but don't go spitting it in everyone's face. If you think being wrong about a prediction is ruining your credibility, then I suggest you stop making friends with people who gauge your value solely based on your political prowess.
Kek.
Look it's natural even for mixed-up retard penguins.
Follow the mixed-up retarded penguins. They are so woke.
>"The merit of the orator is to speak the truth"
The merit of the orator is to communicate the truth. Speaking it isn't enough these days.
Consider your approach as well as your message. Is your goal to bring people to Q? Why? Will it benefit them any more than if you were to just make yourself available to answer their questions?
This isn't about growing an army. We already have that. This is about helping people who need answers.
The difference is running around waving a Q flag - rather then offering an explanation to those who are confused and willing to listen.
Don't try to redpill anyone. That's the wrong approach. Not everyone can swallow such a large pill. Hell, If they could, they'd probably be here already.
Unfortunately, it only runs on high end graphics accelerators, and the texture mapping causes it to glitch out at speeds over 40fps.
>If the answers you give are bullshit they stop listening to you
Then stop giving em bullshit answers. This isn't rocket science.
You act like this is something Q did to you. YOU fucked up and ran around telling everyone you could predict the future based on Q posts.
I understand the enthusiasm - i really do. But don't think for a moment that you - or anybody- can predict when and what will happen.
Quite the testy fella, aint ya?
>That's some fancy fuckin' word play.
Gonna spell this out for ya. I know your capable of understanding - it was just easier to make your post if you could refute as many of my points as possible, regardless of content.
There is a big difference between communicating and simply speaking. Communication comes in many forms. In fact, the vast majority of communication is nonverbal - even when speaking face-to-face.
Consider the difference between talking to someone and talking at someone. This illustrates the divide between speaking and communicating, in this context. Shall we go further?
No, I get it. The tone of the post (regarding the fancy fuckin' wordplay) spurred me into action. Semantics and wordplay is important. Especially around here.
Absolutely. Though in the context I was addressing was more of a "tactful approach vs. beating someone over the head with a big, plastic Q sign".
>again there is NO FUCKING reason there have been no arrests, ZERO.
Posting this from the previous bread.
Keep in mind, every one of these assholes is holding a gun to the heads of the entire civilian population. That's how they got away with their crimes in the first place. Tribunals can only happen after they drop the weapon - and they all have to drop them at once. Otherwise, the rest will start shooting.
If it works for you, go for it.
I prefer a more diplomatic approach.
Don't bother being the instigator. Rather, look for places to drop seeds (questions) in their heads. Socratic Method works unusually well.
Rather then spelling it out with facts and figures (which you may get wrong and inadvertently sink your own message) you can direct them to where the can do their own research if they wish - which 9/10 times they wont. Only when they are sinking in their own drool after the fact will they come running for your guidance.
In the mean time - speak vaguely of an ugly plot spanning generations. If they bite, continue as normal. If they call you a conspiracy theorist - they were unreachable to begin with. Reminder: Only do this if they ask for it. It's their information. You are simply giving to them.
>Bullshit, arresting a few will not trigger a massive attack. Releasing FISA and the IG will not destroy the Republic.
You clearly have no idea what your talking about and have completely underestimated the enemy. Have fun with yourself.
>Ignoring the socratic mood i was in earlier which you glazed over…
I admit, I tend to overlook the more nuanced style in written form - even when it's clearly spelled out.
It's a character flaw. But I took it in exchange for dual-weapon-specialization. Even trade.
>You can't tell me that if the Podesta's were arrested by Mueller they would nuke the planet.
No I cant. Nor do I think that would happen.
You're having a hard time with this, aren't you?
Just look at how many nominations are being held up right now. Red wave fixes that.
Nothing will happen until justice can actually be served legally. That's the whole point of this op.
And yes - it will be glorious.
Fucking historic. Truly.
I think this is the first time Cosmonauts managed to survive anything.
You've been on vicodin for 22 years?
Sure. But can it move a box?