dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

Example of Info Warfare on this board

Anons and Bakers

Please be aware that there is some evidence that shills are working alone or in teams to create false notables that look real and then criticizing bakers who do not include them. Or if they do, shills later attack for a false notable, calling out the "shill baker." Sometimes anons will make positive statements but don't use the word "notable," so a shill can later come back and say it was not "nominated." Other times, it IS nominated (by shills) but if baker falls for it, they will say baker is stupid (or a shill) for falling for these tactics (maybe the same shill who nominated it).

Case in point; Don Jr wearing a MAGA t shirt. There was a hard push to get me to include it and I would not (too easy to fake). So they tried at start of NB:

>>6625496, >>6628631

but I wouldn't bite.

Tried again with the next baker, this time successfully:

>>6626664, >>6626747 Trump JR in a MAGA, Punisher Skull [PAIN] shirt (also with "3%" militia logo)

Still think it's fake. If so, not the baker's fault, these guys are slick. May be one guy with multiple IPs. Probably one or two anons in there, too, easy to get sucked in.

Another post I DID include (it was an end of bread post):

>>6625345 New USAF tweet; anon ties to q posts

At least one person didn't like it, but look at how they asked baker about it:

>>6625662

My response:

>>6625700

Anons replies--note the ref to "suspect shit in the notables":

>>6625713

When asked about that, he didn't respond

>>6625742

FF to two breads later: same objection again but now there were moar anons present who blew him off:

>>6626296

>>6626519

Other examples:

>>6626030 some 4channers talking about "big happenings" on July 4 (not notabled PB, but NB, there was clamouring for notable): >>6626290 , which anons rejected, so end of story. >>6626293

Pic of a boyscout jamboree that someone hoped baker would see as a POTUS rally (because why else include it?). He was successful:

>>6626018

until another anon traced the pic:

>>6626177

---------------------------

Suggestions:

Bakers, be especially carefully right now when including ANYTHING that doesn't come pre-sauced (from a published source), even when nommed Notable.
Anons, plz call out suspicious-looking posts, espec. when posters seem to clamor for or against it being notable

* Remember that Notables are not Endorsements (so no need to cry "shill baker" over notables that are not easy to evaluate on the fly)

>>6628664

RE CLOCK POSTS

Historically, there has been much disagreement about clock posts. When you call them shill posts, you suggest that either the clockfags or bakers posting them are shills. But is that really true? Probably not. At worst, the clockfags failed to discern what Q was telling them about the Q clock; and the bakers did not the depth of knowledge re the Q clock to be certain one way or the other.

'''It's a serious thing to call a digger or baker a shill, especially when it's clear–at the very least–that this person has spent a lot of time and energy in their work. Shills typically don't do that (unless you include long boring spams, but then those you only have to generate once). Instead, they toss off a few sentences, usually full of accusations and often foul language. They try to create drama and division, which anons do not.

Anons collecting notes?

Anonymous ID: 35f989 May 30, 2019, 11:27 a.m. No.6628867 🗄️.is 🔗kun >>8912

>>6628704

>>6628759

There are quite a few scams that show up which newer-fags like me don't know about. I just fell two days ago for the fake post "Crisis actors needed in LV." Good thing when I bake that I ask anons for feedback.

There are others I fallen for, too, but it didn't occur to me until recently that this seems to be becoming a new and powerful shill tactic that's especially good for attacking bakers. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

IDEA

'Any anon feel moved to collect the most common scams used on this board to fool anons and bakers? OLDER scams are especially hard to track for anyone who arrived somewhat later to the party.

>>6628756

Shilly response here. Either that, or really, really dumb. But you won't have that problem for this bread because there's no baker, is there?

>>6628835

Thanks for your thoughtful comment. Alas, there are posts all over this bread calling out bakers in particular–like the one just below you: >>6628836

Something has to change, doesn't it?

Yesterday, I came in about this time, very late bread, and baked a bread for which there were NO NOTABLES COLLECTED. I gathered a few, baked, and left anons instructions to go back and get the notes from the previous bread and start collecting notes for this present bread. Then left (late) for IRL appt.

Returned to later to find that shills in NB said I lied about my arriving late ("shill baker") and that the small list of notables demonstrated that. They had the "baker change" wiped out, so it would look like I have never contributed (which I got reinstated).

So today I'm not baking this bread.

Anons, want to learn to bake?

If so, I'll help you. Two parts: collecting notes and baking.

Anyone on this list collected notes or want to start now? Anyone else?

How about baking? You can split the two tasks up if you want.

Need help? Just ask.

Anonymous ID: 35f989 May 30, 2019, 11:57 a.m. No.6629117 🗄️.is 🔗kun >>9162

>>6629080

I know, anon, I've been smack dab in the middle of it. Shills and the mgmt team. I'm not going to accuse mgmt of being comp'd, I would just like to know–like everyone would–what's going on here. And what we can do to make things better.

But at this moment, I'm just hoping someone will take notes on this bread or volunteer to bake it. Watching to see what unfolds.

>>6629002

thanks for replying, not sure what you mean about adding keks. I'm feelin' pretty serious at the moment, moar peckish than kekish. This breads coming to an end and there's no notes or baker, unless someone's taking notes on the sly. But it's not me.