>>6695691

>>6695744

Baker I don't get your reasoning here. We have people literally linking timestamps and words in Twitter feeds and that is considered notable.

How is a cp porn storm not notable? It's the ultimate slide. Shouldn't that mean we should dig around the slide to see if there's something there? And wouldn't it be nice to be able to find it in past notables to see if there's a pattern to them?

What is this retarded newfag missing? I get the other guy is off his rocker and potentially a shill, I just don't see what the goal of the shill is. Can you/someone help me?

>>6695865

Honestly I'm not outraged. More confused and concerned as to what was slid. Worried about missing a notable more than I care about the contents of the slide. It's just you'd assume the severity of the slide is proportional to the attacks.

Again, could lead on wild goose chases for sure, I concede that. But it's not like q doesn't do that too. So not sure I really get the reticence.

If you're so disgusted by it you can't function then you really don't understand what we're up against. Or should take a break and let others carry the load. But to ignore it completely is bizarre.

Also I'm just asking for an explanation of the protocol. I haven't attacked baker at all. Just trying to understand the reason.

>>6695885

Hence the ultimate slide anon. Get Anons to not focus on bread. That's my entire point.

>>6695906

https://files.catbox.moe/qeazt6.png

Because of course he is.