PLEASE NEW BAKER NEEDED
Add the shill info back into the dough. Not sure who took it out. After all those Q drops, it’s important that that shit is at the top. It was there with breads yesterday.
No notables from 1098 or 1099 too. That was during the drops. Seems absurd that there was nothin of value in 2 entire breads.
IMO, this current Baker is new or a shill.
And the bastard took out all the info on shill techniques. That’s super important for newfag to read, and read multiple times. It also serves as a deterrent to shills. They know if their tactics are known, they are useless.
Please get that info back into the dough.
Add this
Don't get suckered into wasting your time. Hardened anons should already know all this shit; This is more of a crash course for the new visitors.
How to Quickly Spot a Clown:
– Attempting to get a divisive or emotional knee-jerk trigger response from (you) to derail research is a red flag.
– Concern trolling and copy/pasta spam shilling that contradicts confirmed findings is another red flag.
– Employing faux debate tactics: Generalizations, gas-lighting, misdirection, false equivalences, confusing correlation with causality, appeal to authority, transference, false precepts, personal attacks, straw-men, red herrings, etc. are all yet another red flag.
– Promoting social ethics that are disingenuous, such as doxxing anyone, "reverse psychology" ploys or ones based on lying to the American People; these are obvious red flags.
– Promoting tactics that are unethical, illegal or involve violence outside the scope of the Law are huge warning signs.
– Employing Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt tactics for any reason is highly suspicious.
– Topic sliding: If very sensitive information of a critical nature has been posted on a discussion forum, it can be quickly removed from public view by topic sliding. In this technique a large number of unrelated posts, or posts aimed at diluting the information being presented, are submitted in an effort to trigger a topic slide to literally push content out of view. An operator can control several fake UIDs via the bots they make use of; these can also be called upon in the other techniques to try to mask the intent of the operator from the users at large. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and bogus postings.
– Seeding bad information: Operatives will insert flawed or bogus information from time to time as an ongoing tactic, depending on their skill set and the needs of their mission. Their most common ruse is providing information or evidence which is backed by bad source material in the hope that the "source of the source" is never checked. This serves several objectives, mainly resource consumption, evidence pollution, discouragement and misdirection.
– Astroturfing consensus: This is a technique that attempts to build a manufactured consensus around a flawed set of statements or compromised information. This is related to consensus cracking, where false evidence is injected in an attempt to dispute or discredit what the current consensus is, and push it towards the desired false consensus. Misleading and false evidence and information are often salted into the evidence pool, with an aim to impede organic consensus building, while also poisoning the available information and evidence.
How to spot a Clown's bot
– NEVER KNOWINGLY ENGAGE A BOT DIRECTLY. It just wastes bread with their responses, and hands them a target to programmatically lock on to without handler interaction. If you suspect a bot is trying to engage (you), these countermeasures will force the handler to earn it, which usually outs them; They are lazy. It seems that the easiest way to foil the bots is to point them out by proxy, by copy/pasting the user's ID as a quoted reference and intentionally breaking its post link in your response and/or answering it with a meme until they start misfiring because they can't parse the response to lock onto a target correctly.. Doing this can also make the bots look artificially erratic and easier for other anons to spot.
What we know about the cl0wnbots
– Require a handler to watch for, target, and be in the thread
– Cannot enter threads themselves
– Can pick up random or contradictory meme flags
– Consist of multiple bots that respond to posts and each other, and can create posts
– Activate on lists of trigger words; these can change over time
– Use a combination of legit pasta, pre-written points, or spam targeted at sliding the thread
– Have unwittingly pasta'd supportive posts
– Are employed mostly at night and on weekends (US time)
– Add to bump limits
– Can be filtered by ID once they are observed
– Are not perfected and can be easily spotted
– Were tested briefly prior to being deployed starting on the /CBTS/ board
– Have certain flaws that can cause them to misfire in sometimes comical ways
– The handlers can make bogus clown threads, but also can be confused by accidental ones
– Handlers, as of now, cannot access the servers
– Have still not succeeded in their mission
– Still can't meme
– Still can't meme
I understand. We used to have a newfag stead this and I mean it disclaimer at the top of every bread which has since been taken down.
That’s what I’m getting at. Just make sure something is up there regarding shills. I didn’t write the one I just linked. I’m a phone fag right now so if need be, I can style one up later that’s easier on the eyes when I get back to my pc.
Im just stressing the importance of having some sort of how to deal with shills at the top of ever bread. As the shills have themself said, once we know their techniques, their value is rendered useless.
ii - thanks, Sir.
You’re correct.
That makes no sense. A shill baker decided to add info regarding shills into the dough, and then upon removal of that “watch for shills info”, he complains??? You’re an idiot if u actually think that a shill baker would fight to get “how to spot a shill” info back into the bread. Now I know you’re a shill Baker. Go hang urself.
Boo hoo. Cry me a fucking river. Man up and take some criticism.
In the Nag Hammadi, I believe book of Thomas, Jesus tells his disciples that after he’s gone, only his brother James will be worthy of following. Something along those lines. Maybe another biblefag can add to this.
Interesting comment tho u made. Thx.
Not a shill. Guy is right about the Paulinian bullshit that’s proliferated the church since Christ’s reign.
He’s also right about Nag Hammadi. ITs like reading the gospels on steroids. Undoubtedly Jesus’ teachings that the Roman Empire tried to burn (who book burns? Commies).
Filter is biblefags if u want but you’re only shorting urself. We don’t only post ecclesiastical stuff. It’s easy to move onto next post if u notice the religious content and you’re too much of a pussyfaggot to let your conscious go there.