Anonymous ID: 18497b May 20, 2020, 10:11 a.m. No.9252398   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2414 >>2418 >>2485 >>2552

>>9252366

Thanks baker.

 

★ ★ ★

#Obamagate meme warfare

Pick additional hashtags from the below list

#BrennanKnew

#ClapperKnew

#ComeyKnew

#McCabeKnew

#StrzokKnew

#LisaPageKnew (that's to distinguish it from the other Page, Carter)

#YatesKnew

#LynchKnew

#BruceOhrKnew

#BidenKnew

#SchiffKnew''

#HillaryKnew

#PowerKnew

#MuellerKnew''

''#RiceKnew

#SubpoenaObama

#Coup

★ ★ ★

Anonymous ID: 18497b May 20, 2020, 10:33 a.m. No.9252580   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2623 >>2644

>>9252520

OK, what specifically is OP_MW_2020?

How are anons supposed to do an Op when we don't know what it is?

Please point out specifically what anons are doing right (if anything!) and what anons are failing to do, or not doing right.

Anonymous ID: 18497b May 20, 2020, 10:42 a.m. No.9252719   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2747 >>2765 >>2829 >>2839

>>9252623

Do anons have to be a TV station, a newspaper, a formal news website, etc. to become credible?

Do we have to form a company with a board of directors and shareholders to be seen as credible?

Do we have to present the facts in a format that normies are used to?

Will true info presented via social media EVER be credible to the majority?

 

Is the problem one of content, style, timing, channel selection…

Is the problem related to the constant dilution of our efforts by shills?

Do we have to put out a newsletter?

A newspaper?

A website controlled by an editorial board that is capable of excluding shill content?

 

If our efforts are not working then we need to do something different…

What is our process to assess if it's working?

What data and metrics do we use?

Do we discuss them here where the entire world can see our discussions and counteract them?

 

Frustrated