>>6813794

>>6813827

Good job stepping up, obviously no one else did.

Understand this isn't bitching, but needs to be pointed out, nevertheless.

The thread titles NEED to follow the format of:

Q Research General #87xx [then your title for the thread you're making]

This is imperative for not only the anons who are archiving everything (so threads maintain order and are NOT saved randomly), but also for SEARCH purposes.

The SEARCH scripts presume the given format and will WILL NOT work correctly when the threads have random names.

Recommend to request BO (or a BV if they can)

rename this thread to the proper format.

An immeasurable amount of grief could be avoided by doing so.

>>6814453

NO BREAD LEFT BEHIND

This thread needs renamed to the proper format.

The other thread ( the younger by 400 posts) needs to be renumbered to 8717.

Were they the same age/time the other thread does in fact follow the correct format and should have been the one kept for that reason.

However, this tread has 400 more posts and should not be trashed simply because of the baking error(s).

The second thread creator should have numbered his thread 8717. Then the problem would have solved itself when this thread was correctly renamed.

I hope you two aren't working together to make an easy task and impossible one.

Now BO gets to fix BOTH of them.

>>6814537

See

>>6814535

No reason to not keep both. FFS

>>6814506

MAYBE It's not a big deal to YOU because you are NOT an archivist OR a search user.

You talk just like a (selfly perceived 'educated') SHILL.