Anonymous ID: 40c29d Nov. 3, 2018, 3:09 p.m. No.3718218   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8242

>>3718200

I suspect we are supposed to read between the lines. Or behind the lines. How did that pick circulate? Who caused it to be circulated? It was circulating long before Q.

I think that is a form of fake news. I think that might be the point.

There is much much fakery on the internet. Look, for example, [here]

Anonymous ID: 40c29d Nov. 3, 2018, 3:16 p.m. No.3718314   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>3718273

I didn't say anything against them. If you are human, and find them awesome, that's great. The fact that "that anon" can't even respond, and that you are jumping in to defend, and the memes are really rather monotonous, all tend to suggest that both "that anon" and you are bots. That is just how things work. But if neither of you are bots, and show it in some way, then I will gladly apologize.

But if you are bots, just go to sleep.

Anonymous ID: 40c29d Nov. 3, 2018, 3:18 p.m. No.3718328   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

We are getting a panorama of bizarre bot activity today. Earlier, the board was anti-semitic. Now it is promoting Satanism, and engaged in other random and irrelevant fake chan noises.

Anonymous ID: 40c29d Nov. 3, 2018, 3:21 p.m. No.3718353   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8376 >>8402 >>8439

>>3718315

Right.

But if Q is posting that pic, then it would imply, on normal assumptions, that he thinks it is real. And it would follow that anons would use it, meme it, and hence discredit themselves. All of this, regardless of the truth about Byrd.

So I think Q is trying to induce a deeper understanding through anons questioning the posting of a shopped pic.

HOW did that shopped pic first circulate?

Would AUTISTS get fooled? Or were autists irrelevant to the propagation of it?

And what does that tell us?

Anonymous ID: 40c29d Nov. 3, 2018, 3:24 p.m. No.3718388   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8482

>>3718333

It is always very strange when you ask an anon a question, IT FALLS MUTE, and then other anons jump in to defend the anon (although in this case there isn't even an attack). This has happened over and over and over.

The memes look absolutely like a machine is spitting them out. That is all I said. Do you disagree with that?

Indeed, it would seem fairly obvious that there is a form of bot that very efficiently pulls images off the internet, figures out bland, generic "Q stuff" that can be put, and cranks out vast numbers of memes in this manner.

The memes, in themselves, appear innocuous, and even positive.

What the purpose of the faking is, I don't know. But as a rule, i am highly mistrustful of everything the bot system posts.

Anonymous ID: 40c29d Nov. 3, 2018, 3:29 p.m. No.3718443   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8447 >>8477

>>3718402

Did my words imply that I think Q thinks it's real?

If Q posts a meme, what could the phrase "a meme is just a meme" mean in relation to it? Is anything Q posts likely to be casual as that phrase implies?

Obviously Q doesn't want to discredit us, and is unlikely to fall for the fake image. So those are the two premises from which reasoning should start, IMO.

Anonymous ID: 40c29d Nov. 3, 2018, 3:35 p.m. No.3718509   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>3718447

What I believe is certain is this: there is a TON of fakeness on the internet. Tons of fake memes, aimed at co-optation and discreditation. Tons of that [here]. Look at the fake NPC meme. Look at the "mutt memes" of a while back, which were actually the most creepy and bizarre thing I've ever seen. But beyond the "big campaigns", there is a continual process of faking going on, all over the internet. This process prevents people from working together, it prevents ideas from advancing, it presents truth from being collectively found, and it creates false, negative images of DISSENT against the mainstream narratives.

Anonymous ID: 40c29d Nov. 3, 2018, 3:41 p.m. No.3718573   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>3718557

If you can't explain what you're talking about, what can I do for you anon? People can look at my posts and memes and decide for themselves what I'm doing here. You, on the other hand, are just ranting bizarrely. Good luck botty.

Anonymous ID: 40c29d Nov. 3, 2018, 3:49 p.m. No.3718660   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8694

>>3718641

Don't get things twisted, pushing-Satanism-anon. We see through that, and all the cant about "control" and the implied (false) equivalences.

We aren't fooled by satanism, and you are cordially invited to banish yourself. Cheers!