Hey baker, I'm hoping baker from lb will show up soon to relieve you. I'm a little burned out and needing to get stuff done today, but I'll be around to bake a wee stretch in a pinch.
I'll check back in 10min. from now (or around 250, whichever comes first). Ty for the always stellar bakeage.
>Hey, 1045 here
>I'm the guy who got the ( you ) on Q's 1045th post.
Dude. Namefagging is cancer. We don't do that here. And namedropping on top of it–you imply that just bc Q rt'd you (and even if he did, how would anons/baker know it was you?) that we are to make notable an unsauced factual accusation based only on your word (not hearsay from your perspective, but from ours. If you really are a legit practicing lawfag, you'd know this is spurious.
Agree baker, ty for your diligence and professionalism. Always appreciated.
thanks anons
Ty anon. Interesting that our lawfag fren wanting us to put potentially false accusations in notables is also a concernfag, no?
>I hope you are right. 11:11 passed without anything from them, and 11:11 means much more than people understand right now (apart from a parade on veterans day) The fact that they picked that date then allowed it to pass without any visible progress is troubling.
>without any visible progress
>without any visible progress
>without any visible progress