Hasn't anyone around here learned anything in the last three years? Claiming authority on an anon board? We can all appreciate the work you do, but the rush to judgement in the last bread, followed by a bunch gang of abusive tolls who are all so sure of the authenticity of the new trip, would make some of us question your judgement. If it turns out to be really Q, great, if not oh well. But for you, you have put your stake in the sand, not sure why.
>>7412886 Many have done a lot of work around here, few use that work to prove their judgement is better suited to be believed. The ego (naming oneself) is a tricky thing. An explanation of why the proof is valid is much more convincing.
Sorry, here for the same reason you, skepticism has always been an autistic trait. Blind belief in following the herd is not what made this board valuable (but there is a lot of that around here too).
>>7412943 I think most of us would feel more comfy if the first part of your analysis was done prior to resalting. But the assertion that /projectdcomms/ is Q's came out of nowhere with a bunch of anons making the clam then pummeling anyone who questioned it. Show the proof that it is Q's board and we will all pipe down.
Thank you, problem solved.