some of you might see it as 'heretical', but I'll post anyway:

Theory on the significance of Q's confirmed delta markers:

[0] = POTUS and Q are together

[1] = Message Confirming Q or Crumbs

[5] = Message Related to Crumbs

[10] = Delta Test with Message

[15] = Delta Test (comms test)

[1 year delta] = some events occur a year after Q informed anons about it, or are reoccurring yearly

(example of an event occurring a year after Q informed anons about it was "Flynn is safe")

(example of an event reoccurring yearly is the camp david pen pics)

"Wind the clock w/ all markers" seems to indicate the "Clock" is a DELTA COUNTER, using the confirmed DELTA MARKERS of [0], [1], [5], [10], [15], and [1 year] for COMMS

IMO, THE CLOCK IS ESSENTIALLY A METAPHORICAL STOPWATCH

*Notes:

• just a theory based off confirmed deltas, AND HOW THEY ARE USED BY Q AND POTUS

• these deltas are in units of MINUTES, but anything less than a [1] delta is a [0] delta

(crumb #2140 for example confirms this)

• a delta can be between a crumb and a tweet/retweet, between tweets/retweets, or between crumbs and crumbs

(this includes tweets that correct misspelling, which also matter for comms)

• there are exists unintentional deltas

(crumb #2616 for example confirmed this)

• NOT EVERY [#] is a delta marker, and many [#] are just general markers

(context matters)

• NOT EVERY delta is a confirmed delta MARKER

([6] and [7] are examples)

— Theory of the [6] and [7] deltas based on their usage (can only find one confirmed occurrence for each):

[6] = Device Delta Test

[7] = Word For Word Message

— Q also replied once about a [2] delta

(crumb #1756 for the [2] delta)

— Q also replied once for a [22] delta

(crumb #606 for the [22] delta, but I'm pretty sure it's a 21 minute delta, so not adding or thinking about)

— Q also noted a [17] delta between POTUS' tweets when he acknowledged an anon's request

(pun intended, crumb #2577)

• NOT EVERY DELTA IS SHOWN IN THE GRAPHIC, just included the ones that were confirmed

— WOULD LOVE TO KNOW OTHER DELTAS TO SEE IF THIS THEORY HOLDS FOR THEM TOO

THREAD FOR WORKING ON A DATABASE FOR DELTAS:

>>4854665

>>4854665

>>4854665

>>4864949

as a non-clockfag, I've always had a problem with that

Q says to "wind the clock w/ all markers", and markers appear WELL before that crumb

besides, that was a 10 day clock that ended on the 17th, the 10 days of darkness

>>4865071

>>4864949

this is what I'd personally think would be the "Qclock"

>>4865191

too small, trying again

>>4865325

this isn't my clock, this is clockfags' clock

iirc, the grey is before Q said "start the clock"

but if you read my thoughts, that doesn't make much sense: >>4865071

made a clock just to show it still works the same (pic related)

still unclear what the clockfags' convention is, so I used the minute timestamp of the crumb connected to a date (green) and the date of crumb connected to another date (red)

>>4861407

see: >>4865196

just for me personally (or other interested by it), could you make a clock where the [:0] marker is 10/28?

I can get it to line up exactly like you have it

only if you'd want to

>>4865846

I thought it was because 12/7 is on the :0 marker

been asking for months

>>4866452

I've never seen that graphic as showing "confirmations", nor do I now

you just wouldn't want to change it so you didn't need to throw away all your other stuff

having the :0 marker at 12/7 was never made legitimate sense, so I don't really clockfag

plus using the seconds and minutes interchangeably bothers me too

>>4866851

>>4866781

see: >>4865500

not a clockfag, that's just one (literally did it today)

just suggesting the idea

always bothered me the clock starts at 12/7, when there are significant markers and timestamps before it

so no clockfag, in the clockfag thread, can or will make a clock that actually starts when Q started, meaning the :00 is at 10/28? Is it that blasphemous to propping up clockfaggotry?

>>4953120

I just did, and I didn't see anything

what I mean is literally starting the clock so that 10/28 is :00

see the pic: >>4952880

I just simply wanted one all nicely done like clockfags have it, mine is out o synch by a bit

but this is an example of why so many anons have problems with the "Qclock": >>4588198 (lb)

it's pathetically hilarious, and a clockfag did a great job of calling it out: >>4589625 (lb)

clockfags gotta look out for other clockfags, because if they don't blatant disinfo will be pushed in Q's name (like the JFK jr bullshit)

.. which I see a lot of from a few """clockfags"""

>>4953423

I'm not a clockfag, just visiting

no idea wtf you're doing

>>4953375

I'll look again, I was talking about it in the beginning of this thread

was just an idea

the 12/7 start to the clock never made and still doesn't make sense to me