dChan
Anonymous ID: d6970b Dec. 8, 2018, 7:08 p.m. No.4221258   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1286

Q Twatter Callouts A Tactic To Entrap Big-Tech Censorship theory

 

It just occurred to me that a very, very good way to gather a data set of proof of censorship would be to

 

artificially inflate a subset of accounts via something like a Q-callout. Then capture the 'peak'

 

followers on those called-out accounts. Track the average # gained per day, (new follower count, not net

 

follower count). Do the same for 'leftist' accounts.

 

Track how many are lost per hour and per day.

 

Reconicile the conservative, Q follower accounts vs the leftist accounts.

 

I went from 79 followers to, at the peak, ~3900. and I lose about 1 every 15 minutes - but I also 'gain'

 

new followers, based on notifications, at the rate of anywhere from 3 to 10 per hour (including overnight

 

  • that's the low end). Given that Q followers aren't exactly the type to jump ship and unfollow within a

 

few days, I find it very unlikely that it's organic unfollows. Even more unlikely that it's simply bot

 

accounts that're being banned given the mass-influx all came from 1 effective source.

 

Maybe this is a tactic to gather proof against social media companies?

 

Notice, I'm not posting my tweets or promoting my 'content' so can we keep the responses limited to on-

 

topic thoughts about this theory?

Anonymous ID: d6970b Dec. 8, 2018, 7:21 p.m. No.4221379   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1486

>>4221286

 

Well, exposure is great for Q and all, but it's not like Q wasn't getting that anyway, such as it were, even with the tech censorship. And WE don't really need the confirmation that comes from Q posting a twitter post here. So what is the gain? Other than a reason to make a post where otherwise there wasn't much?

 

It's established (I'm living proof) that there's no endorsement of reposted tweets from Q. At least, not for the account of the individual being reposted.

 

So what's gained?

 

Lets think about it from the 50 yard line, box seat perspective.

 

Q reposts a screenshot of a tweet.

The account of the post gets exploded in notifications, retweets, followers and, basically, gets tons of exposure.

Account increases geometrically from tens or hundreds of followers to thousands, tens of thousands, and in a few circumstances hundreds of thousands.

Account begins 'bleeding' followers at a higher rate than they gain, even if the 'gain' is steady and consistent.

  • bleed appears to be on a schedule. for me, about 1 every 15 minutes, occasionally 2.

  • large gains of followers are offset every time by a subsequent large 'loss'

this can be tracked easily with software developed by anybody with a week or two of time and the inclination to do so.

 

There's no way that I am aware of, that we can identify a mirror occurring on the left (that is, someone on the left getting windfall endorsements via a highly notable leftist figure) but that doesn't mean it's not happening.

 

Q is absolutely at war with Jack and Zuck, wouldn't it be not only logical but extremely vital to prove, via inarguable data, that the censorship is directly targeting MAGA supporters?

 

Kid's bugging me so my ability to string together 3 coherent thoughts is spent for the time being, but I think this suffices as an overview for discussion and/or digging among anons.

Anonymous ID: d6970b Dec. 8, 2018, 7:41 p.m. No.4221624   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>4221485

wha?

 

what a stupid interpretation of a plainly stated fact.

 

Comey posted it for real, no fucktard photoshopped it to claim he did. It is possible that it was photoshopped to put comey in that location prior to Comey posting it but would it really matter?

 

It's the message that was important. And it's you being a fucking sensitive idiot here.