>>5733861 pb
TY Anon.
Start with the anagram. The gemetria is not essential to the decode. It supplements. One's mileage may vary, of course.
Where was 8 subtracted from 3?
The two anagrams are found in the same Q post. In one it is no big leap (neither in deciphering nor in meaning) to read HRC in place of HER, given the context. In this anagram there are three letters of which 2 are H and C.
In the other anagram there is an association with the timestamp from which 3 and 8 fall out. That is, C and H. The second exchange is no big leap, really, given the presence of the number nine both in the anagram and in the news context and in the ID of the statute that finally set the number of Justices to nine.
This not nearly as random as you might have first thought. But your critique is fine as it goes. Gemetria is not essential to these decodes.
If the logic and reasoning must be supplied to you, explicitly, rather than your reaching the path on your own, that is okay, of course, and I find that seeing patterns is not purely a matter of step-by-step logical methodology. Not in normal conversations and not in reading body language or facial expressions and the like. The same goes for picking up on symbolism. Some pattern seeing is not readily explained in a way that a linear thinker might rely upon.
While your remarks are not really a test of who I am, Anon, nor is my feedback a test of who you are – whether or not you take this positively. It is not my task here to discredit you nor your methods.
I would hope you have not made it your task to discredit others who contribute here. It is a war that requires an arsenal of many kinds.
Cheers and happy hunting.