Anonymous ID: 70f4d3 March 26, 2019, 11:06 p.m. No.5917843   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7891

>>5917535

Ty baker! And thanks for taking my suggestions to remove those two I pointed out lb. Again, it's after the fact at this point, so no worries, but anons have been talking about notables buns being too big and new bakers needing to be 'splained about it, so I thought I'd offer da feedback while I was around.

Anons, please help baker by going thru notables and pointing out posts that aren't sauced or noteworthy

 

These could be have been pruned to create a tighter bun:

 

1) >>5917104 Apparently there was no news or justice at the DOJ before POTUS was elected

Cap isn't sauced, and doesn't necessarily provide positive evidence of what's being concluded

 

2) >>5916896 Borderline Bar & Grill dig

This is just incoherent rambling. Poster mentions images but the post doesn't contain them, and no one would open all those links to follow that info as presented. Either anon figures out a way to make info graphics to lead us thru the info, or it's undecipherable and thus not noteworthy.

 

3) >>5917200 Can You Be Pro-Life AND Pro-Vaccine? A Nurse Speaks

We generally never put blogs of rando ppl in unless there is a specific claim that is sauced within the blog itself. Long video treatises like this are too broad in their claims for baker to do be able to vet all claims.

 

4) >>5917170 sauce for rachelduh email

You may want to remove this notable from the dough as BO/BV will likely delete the post. It's important we don't publish personal contact information of public persons or their family members as it could be interpreted as exposing them to acts of politically motivated violence. We want to protect 8chan as best we can.

Anonymous ID: 70f4d3 March 26, 2019, 11:19 p.m. No.5917930   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7975

>>5917891

Don't get me wrong, anon, I'm glad you posted it – both for the humor and the info, as those kind of finds often spark other finds. Was just saying I didn't think it was notable.

>the sauce is easy to obtain

But the point is that baker needs to vet all caps in order to make sure they weren't shopped. Q's posted on this a number of times, how easy it is to make mistakes with unsauced caps. If anons don't include the URL sauce, it takes baker a lot longer to find the sauce, and they usually just don't do it. This gets us into trouble. If you don't feel like making a notable-ready post just to share a thought, that's no prob. But the expectation is that any claims need to include URL sauce that baker has vetted before noting.