dChan
Anonymous ID: 2851b2 Jan. 15, 2019, 7:13 p.m. No.4772642   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2651 >>2768 >>2868 >>2897 >>2922 >>3173

>>4772300

[Marker] = [something within the brackets]

made a graphic laying out all the [markers] before this post (pic1, 1/6/18) in chronological order

trying to see what the clock Q wanted is

ALL Q CRUMBS BEFORE "Wind the clock w/ all markers" with [markers]

there could be others not within brackets, but I stuck with all crumbs with them in it, including the [repost]s

*the only other reference to a clock was the a crumb saying "start the clock" referencing the 10 day clock for the 10 days of darkness from the 12/7/17 to 12/17/18, and since the crumb had no marker, I did not include it

plus, we need to "wind the clock w/ ALL MARKERS, so it doesn't make sense to start Q's clock on the 7th if there are clearly many markers before it

starts in the top left corner, a goes down chronologically, starting a new column for room

Anonymous ID: 2851b2 Jan. 15, 2019, 7:23 p.m. No.4772768   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2985 >>3090

>>4772693

see: >>4772642

and no, don't watch YT for Q at all

 

on #454, as you'll see in my graphic, Q is explaining the [5], [10], [15] markers

on #847 and #765, that's a signature, signatures aren't "markers", but 'are very important, like stringers are

and on #792, that's just the title the qmap maintainer gave it, it's not a marker

plus those are after last three are after the time table I'm looking at

I'm specifically looking at all markers before 1/6/18 where Q says to "wind the clock w/ all markers"

 

good discussion though, also doing this with the "43 confirmed connections" to the map (going backwards)

Anonymous ID: 2851b2 Jan. 15, 2019, 7:40 p.m. No.4772985   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3059

>>4772922

>>4772693

>>4772768

>>4772868

to have an indepth discussion about this, I'd rather keep it in the clockfag bread

so I'm going to post my graphic in there

I wanted, due to the recent discussions and disagreements about what exactly the clock is or whether it is in fact the Qclock, to go back to the very beginning and see what Q meant

Q specifically said to wind the clock with the MARKERS, instead of saying with the timestamps

just brainstorming, but collected that graphic based on clearly bracketed markers

>>4772971

nah that's me

you're probably good for the night, I'm here if needed

gonna discuss clockfagging with clockfags

Anonymous ID: 2851b2 Jan. 15, 2019, 7:52 p.m. No.4773178   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3254 >>3272

>>4773090

exactly

the anons' discussions about going back to the basics of the graphic, map, and clock had me thinking:

we can NOW go back and try to reconstruct what Q WOULD'VE meant back when it was posted, with two specific posts as guiders/milestones

  1. the "wind the clock w/ all markers" for the clock

gather all markers prior to that post and see what we can do, with the Qclock or from scratch

  1. the post with "43 confirmed connections"

we can track back from that post to see if we can find 43 "confirmed connections" to the map

started by gathering the markers, because not sure what to make of the connections and what defines tham

the markers are also ill-defined, but at least the bracketed ones can be ID'd easily

(posted in clockfag thread)

Anonymous ID: 2851b2 Jan. 15, 2019, 7:55 p.m. No.4773217   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3228 >>3296 >>3306

>>4773122

I personally think you're a good baker.

It was the way the outgoing baker was acting that had me, other bakers, anons, and the BO thinking.

But the way you reacted was sketchy.

Pretty sure I know which baker you are (other baker has no pastebin), so carry on.

Just know we've had real problems with shills baking and it fucks things up not have a steady and all good baker in the kitchen.

 

If you feel like you're good, carry on, I'm here for a handoff if needed.

https://pastebin.com/DzLcj0GY

Anonymous ID: 2851b2 Jan. 15, 2019, 8:04 p.m. No.4773336   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>4773277

while I disagree it's a marker, I'm going to add it because it literally said "the marker"

>>4773295

it's legitimate spam, while it's stupid anyway, it's posted essentially every bread

shills love when their shit makes it to notables

they're not endorsements, but they act like it is

>>4773306

if you can bake another that'd be helpful

will ebake if there's no new bread by 751 though

I don't see any