>>4336241 Agree, ty
>>4336402 Disagree. While we don't want to be associated with being so lax and soft-headed as to chase non-factual nonsense, we are not only unafraid of being labeled unPC, we WANT to make a loud, clear stand against it. It is the Marxist narrative we are here to push against. The "hooked-nose jew image" you refer to is connected to a long history of researched, fact-based understanding of who comprises the cabal and pushes the destructive policies Q/POTUS are opposing.
>4336496
>Wrong.
<nose images, "kike goy rabbi…"
>IS PLAIN SHILLING.
>Makes us look bad, helps fake news make us look bad.
Yes, and when MSM accuses POTUS of being "unpresidential" or "mentally unfit" for daring to go against (((their))) narrative, it makes him look bad too. You don't see him abandoning the fight so they'll stop calling him names, do you? No, that would be cucking. We don't cuck.
>Hides many actors, blames innocent ones.
This is just another variant of you JIDF shills' favorite strawman fallacy: "they're saying all Jews are guilty and no non-Jews are!!" We've said many times, that's not our argument. Facts support Jews enact group power vastly disproportionate to their percentage in the pop, and that they overwhelmingly support far left, nation-destroying globalist policies. If you can refute that argument with facts, be our guest.
>The definition of shilling.
BO has put post-histories of you shills on the board many times. You push one and only one narrative: "anyone that criticizes Jews is wrong bc feelz & logical fallacies!" with one and only one type of post: complaining. THAT is the definition of shilling.
>Might be a smart use of time to be extra skeptical on all 'herlperanon' posts for the time being.
This
Again, big thanks to you, baker, for respecting anon feedback. I do disagree with the sentiment here, however:
>we frequently note CALLS FOR DIGS that are unsauced or incomplete.
This is true, but I don't think it's a good practice. Many have noticed in recent days there's a new roll-out of shill tactics to discredit us, more subtle. Yes, notables are not endorsements, but they are still meant to be distinct from in-bread spitballing in having gone through the initial screening of bakers and anons and found to meet a standard above "might be worth something, let's see if someone finds something."
It is natural to want the dopamine hit of "making notables." The FB creators admitted that the "like" function created chemical addiction to endogenous edorphines/opioids which are a powerful drug designed to reward mammals for actual achievement. If we cater to anons seeking a dopamine hit for the low-hanging fruit of "hey, this might could be something" we are not going in the direction Q wanted us to go: to be citizen journalists. True journalism is about upholding the standard of reason and evidence. I believe our goal in notables should be to emulate that standard.
If on the other hand we reward improper submissions to notables, we encourage the wrong kind of use of our site, and more important discourage the right kind. Q came here for the autists, let's all anons try to learn from how they do things, not change it to suit our feels.
>4336737
>muh subgroups
Again, no refutation of our facts. This is just a larger word salad of the "but not all Jews…" strawman.
No matter what country Jews live in, or what degree or type of religion they practice, Jews overwhelming support Marxist policies such as open borders, lax enforcement of criminal justice, distribution of wealth from earners to slackers, abortion, LBTQ, war on Christmas, censorship of conservative views, etc. etc. etc. They also make up way over half of the cabal power structure, including our own SCOTUS, but especially the big banks that control all nations.
We don't care about your subgroups, we just want individuals who commit criminal treason exposed via due diligence and stopped within course of the law, without the (((perps))) getting a free pass bc muh antisemitism. If you're not on board with that, you're not a patriot.