>>3494904
>The tactic is to get Anon to acknowledge that there is a hierarchy and thru submission to it (the desire to get-along) or retreat from challenging it, it's further established that (((they))) are above you.
This is projection. Nobody here is above anyone else. And anons know it.
>These Bakers demand certain formats for Notables and nominations; you must do it right, by the rulz set-forth or you will be criticized and not able to see your research reach Notables and your work will be discarded.
Have you ever baked? I bet you haven't because I have, and know how chaotic breads can get when people do not give the common courtesy of at least explaining what is so awesome about their glorious fucking post with no description.
>When that is accomplished, the attic begins on content or truth or sauce or Anons lack of understanding the complex subject, again diminishing the person/poster not the content of what is offered. This tends to get an Anon to ponder the worth of what they've said and/or their expertise to speak on this or anything at all. Congratulations- you have been mind-controlled.
>It's tiny steps, but day-by-day engagement in these behaviors becomes engrained, much like Pavlov's dog. you have been trained to act a certain way, speak in specific manners and to watch how you engage with the Superiors to avoid criticism.
This is word salad. There are no "superiors" here. There are house rules, but those are listed, and all boards have them.
>DO NOT FORGET that this board, as most social media, employs Psychological triggers to frame conversations AND reality!
I can agree with this specific statement categorically.
And these will be the same individuals that bitch the loudest when the baker doesn't post their list every 5 posts to check "muh notables".
Here, I've got a simple system:
Trust yourself
Think for yourself.
Stand up for yourself.
Know them by their fruits.
It's not hard to discern edification from fallacy. Edification has sauced facts to back it..