Final question on Globals debate:

and then I'll drop it.

Do your replies below mean you want the abortion activism notable to remain in Globals or not? Baker has said he's open to anon feedback. Do you have an opinion on this particular Global?

Re: >>5465445 lb (all below are lb)

>>5465475, >>5465484, >>5465485, >>5465492, >>5465533, >>5465598

>I thought this was 8ch not VOAT

>go back to reddit

>We don't need global notables for every damn problem in the world.

>You forgot food allergies, forced vaccinations, insurance fraud, gambling, human trafficking, Lord's prayer, remember to floss daily, etc.

And I appreciate you guys weighing in.

I'm actually glad this place isn't like reddit.

I'm glad you defend it from becoming that way.

>>5466333

>Baker is open

>but won't be removing anything.

These are obvs mutually exclusive.

Pick one.

>>5466316

>NOT

Ty for actually taking a clear position on the question I asked…

>Q posted abortion was not the issue corruption is the issue

…and for providing sound, sauced reasoning for it.

THIS is what makes us NOT reddit or voat.

(or muh feels soccer moms on faceberg)

It's explicitly what Q came here for.

>>5466354, >>5466380

Ty for the feedback. Could you clarify your position on the particular abortion notable in question, and how it reflects your overall take on Globals?

>keep globals meta

By "meta" do you mean 100% exclusive to board admin content?

>>5466317

>you're a complet bozo for pursuing this during POTUS' speech. Got it ?

Fair enough, but it started before the speech, and striking while the iron is hot plays in. Anons can multi-task, and usually digg less during speeches anyway.