>>5431852
How does this get here?
Organic shills?
Is that realistic?
Does the tech to FAKE "anons" exist?
Do we know which companies have invested billions and billions into tech which could easily be used to force "merchant memes" and EVERYTHING ELSE POINTLESS that we see here?
IF the tech exists, does the will to use it exist?
Do the same companies that invested billions in the tech, also have an interest in controlling discourse here, and all over the internet?
Do those companies and the overall power structure of which they are a part have an interest in controlling discussion on the internet?
So, using logic, how much of such technology should we expect to see in use?
Are there limitations to how many posts per thread could be faked?
What limitations?
So why not just try to pour out a steady stream of fakeness, meanwhile using certain bots to target and silence humans?
Enforce a harsh version of "chan culture" to prevent new humans from engaging.
And keep the stream of fakeness flowing nonstop, so that no dissenting movement ever is able to take root…
Use logic, and just LOOK at the board– how much is being faked?
If the tech is there, the will is there, and what we actually see here MAKES NO SENSE, then use logic.
Will patriots ever wake up and demand answers?
YOU must wake up, human patriots here.
YOU.
WAKE UP