>>86341

There's this one:

>>86305

Probably the other baker.

>>86628

>>86689

Looks to me like the anon wants his file in the batter w/o acknowledging the fact that his work has errors. He was here yesterday too and tried the same thing.

>>86749

This >>86772

If you want that other anons work with what you've produced – make sure it is accurate. All else is fake.

>>86819

>>86844

>It is all correct now. I invite anyone to prove it wrong.

I do not understand what is wrong with you, anon, and why you insist to offer us inaccurate work?

I just checked quickly and get like 20 or so differences. Leave it out baker, it is inaccurate.

As for a single example, your first message, original at:

archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/146981635/#147012719

is not an accurate transcription.

>>86844

>>86994

It shouldn't matter who's vouching for you, if your work is incorrect. SA anon had to change his spreadsheet because you had MANY times wrong initially and he used your "raw dump".

It was always other anons pointing out errors in your work, and I am telling you, it still has errors. So stop it already.