Anonymous ID: c05dfb Nov. 12, 2018, 3:43 a.m. No.3864955   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>5023

>>3864938

This has NOTHING to do with saying Q is AI. Q is certainly not AI– what would cause you to put that interpretation on it, "anon"? Don't be shy, explain your thinking, You are, after all, a normal human anon. And human anons, when asked questions, don't fall inexplicably silent– they answer in typically human ways. Thanks friend!

Anonymous ID: c05dfb Nov. 12, 2018, 4:02 a.m. No.3865042   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>5067

>>3865019

"Shilling" is BY DEFINITION not "grassroots"– if it were grassroots, it wouldn't be shilling. Therefore, you are incorrect.

What do you know about AI?

I have to strong encourage those of you "anons" that try to attack and blindly deny discussion of AI that such responses aren't realistic. Humans are CURIOUS, and they have been hearing reports for a long time about AI. They aren't going to be fooled by attempts to pretend that such a thing is unlikely. Therefore, I recommend that the bots attempting to coverup the pervasiveness of AI here figure out a way to admit that there is a massive AI presence. You have no choice at this point– your stratagems are laughable. Thank you and Godspeed.

Anonymous ID: c05dfb Nov. 12, 2018, 4:11 a.m. No.3865080   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>5128

>>3865057

I am an anon; I am just posting material I have– if you are implying otherwise. Meanwhile, do you think you are helping your cause by posting this defense? Do you think humans will see your post and say to themselves "gee whiz, this creepy and bizarre AI thing must be nothing, because this inarticulate "anon" making anon noises called someone a spammer"? I don't think any human would have that response. And given that, should you stop beeping and booping out output of that sort?

If everything the AI system outputs in self-defense against the outing of the AI system is just further evidence of the AI system, and hence counterproductive, should the AI system just stop outputting? Think about it, losers. lol

Anonymous ID: c05dfb Nov. 12, 2018, 4:14 a.m. No.3865099   🗄️.is đź”—kun

>>3865086

AGAIN: that simply is not a correct reading of the term 'organic' in context. You can't just tell us Q's words mean something different than their actual English usage. What is wrong with you anons? What is it about admitting AI shilling that drives you to assault the English language to defend against it?

Anonymous ID: c05dfb Nov. 12, 2018, 4:21 a.m. No.3865129   🗄️.is đź”—kun

>>3865105

>>3865109

It should be obvious. "Branding" oneself is a sure sign of fakeness. Meanwhile, every time the response meme has been posted, "swordy" doesn't even reply. What could make it more clear? "Swordy" can't read memes.

The fakeness isn't even halfway convincing, once you know how to spot it and call it out.

Tick tock, idiotbots…

Anonymous ID: c05dfb Nov. 12, 2018, 4:53 a.m. No.3865299   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>5335 >>5643

>>3865072

>>3865078

>>3865091

>>3865214

>>3864919

TIP

Symbolism is important. Very important. So, I have a hypothesis that actually invoking God is painful to these bots, that are chained to a system of evil. But in English, there is 'God' capitalized, and 'god' uncapitalized– the latter being quite a different thing, of an infinitely lesser magnitude… Now notice: every time the word is either 1. placed at the beginning of a sentence or 2. in all caps, it is AMBIGUOUS as to whether it is actually 'God' or 'god'… and this, I hypothesize, is how the bot system plays a game of pretending it is Godly, when in fact it is just invoking its god…