When did that new pinned thread get pinned and why?
Didn't see when it happened, been there all day though.
And thanks baker!
I agree with that 100%. Deltas have been used for comms the vast majority of the time by Q to show coordination, but in a few cases have been used as a proof. The latest example of that was the verification of the new tripcode.
For example some people sometimes think "graphic", "side by side" and "proof" are synonymous, but they actually are very different. A graphic is just a compilation of things that may or may not have Q related content in them but are used to spread information. A side by side is something that happened which relates to Q to show either contrast or similarities between them. But a "proof" explicitly shows Q is an insider, which for me has a high level it has to meet to be legit. Some things I've thought were proof actually turned out not to be, so I'm skeptical now.
>How did it get PINNED?
That's why I asked, kek.
Don't know.
Just make a thread for it and keep bumping it.
Would love to see non-general threads flourish on /qresearch/. They never really have but for a little they were doing well.
pic1: graphic (non-Q related though)
pic2: side by side
pic3: proof
Side by side in the sense of /qresearch/ and how Q used it of course.
I think McCabe will be first. He's high up, but way better connected than Comey is (his wife, VA gov., HRC, etc).
But realistically, Brennan is entirely plausible.
"The Graphic" was originally the big pics with all the posts in it. I'm just distinguishing graphic from side by side because graphic is broad but side by side is specific. A graphic can be anything really, doesn't even need to relate to a specific post, or can just be a compilation of posts. Like this pic is not a side by side, or a proof, it's just a graphic that lays out information or posts.
It's the "Not all side by sides are proofs but all proofs are side by sides" kinda thing I guess.
Many of the side by sides about Q aren't exactly proof of coordination or proof of insider information, but are used to display some thing or event next to a post to put it into context. Most of the side by sides I see are putting information next to Q to show a coincidence or connection between them, yet not really being a proof. Not all coincidences PROVE something about Q. I think all of the theoretical and unconfirmed side by sides about Q, and some of the deltas I think fit into that category. That's different for [0] deltas though, depends on whether you think that's a proof (I happen to).
But the side by sides that DO show coordination or that Q has insider information are proofs. The few times Q has asked for a side by side is in the context of a proof. I just think it should be clear that not every graphic involving Q is a proof that Q has insider information because a "Q Proof" should absolutely show a clear example of Q being connected to Trump or Q having insider information. That being said ALL graphics, side by sides, and proofs are important. You never know what will get someone to start digging, thinking, or actually following Q.
But on markers, we've talked about that a lot and that's a different conversation. I think there are general markers in kill boxes used to note something important, and then there are delta markers which are numbers within the killbox to note a delta that is used for comms ([0], [1], [5], [10], [15] (minutes), [30] (days), [1 year], and others); which imo Q confirmed as being the clock.
Oh great, AFLB is here.
Exactly and no problem. These kinds of discussions should happen all the time.
Some would think it's semantics but it's important.
There you go.