>>9501977

Q, respectfully, perhaps a refresher on the importance of 'you are the news now' is warranted

A Grassley tweet was removed from notables instead of the baker changing the inaccurate 'cutesy' title

Many bakers are really great and sincere gratitude to them, even tho baking rally isn't difficult, they step up and play a role

Some are less than and have no business being in the kitchen

Their egos get ahead of them and they want to mark their territory piss on the fire hydrant so to speak.

Notables should be precise and accurate so as to be found in a search

Some 'bakers' gang up and bully anons

You want anons to keep posting solid information?

Get the bakers and note takers in check

Some of them are serving no one but themselves

>>9502157

>Not sure what the solution is. Seems like things are largely self-correcting over time tho.

The solution is for anons to speak up

Some 'bakers' and note takers attack anons en mass to prove their self importance.

This board, the information, belongs to ALL of us.

It ir really just a matter of enough anons speaking up for solid, accurate notes with correct and precise titles that can be found in a search

All the 'cutesy' shit has to go.

>>9502192

>the simple solution is for YOU to repost that notable with a proper tag line in bold at the top

The obvious solution is for you to shut your fucking mouth

The Grassley tweet was noted properly [in bold and accurate] then changed by a I'm gonna be cute baker

Then taken out of notables once called out for an inaccurate tiltle

>make it easy for the baker

Yet you expect anons to repost and do double duuy as cover for an idiot baker

Do your homework before you mouth off

Idiot

>>9502313

>anons know but it is worth repeating occasionally for new eyes. Notables are not endorsements

Am aware

But bakers changing titles to some 'cutesy' bullshit title is unacceptable

Take the Grassley tweet re corn

How would anyone find that in a search with the bullshit title that was given?

Some bakers can note information accurately, even if provided in the post

They want to have it about their identity instead of solid information

Day one anon here

I know how to post with accurate info

Title

Bold

Sauce

Always

What I don't expect or want is a stupid baker changing the post title to something that can not be found in a search

Grassley's name wasn't even mentioned

>infiltration not invasion

>>9502421

>good bakers outnumbering bad bakers is the only feasible solution I see

>maybe you'll enlighten me with your solution(s)

First, I can bake, but am usually busy doing research

But could bake if needed

Second

Yesterday there was a good baker that had something in notables from Fakeway Pundit that had nothing but a sensational title and a clickbait link

All Fakeway Pundit does is regurgitate something from a solid source for clickbait

It was regarding the Flynn letter, but true to form Fakeway pundit 'anon' didn't provide anything other than a link so they could get the clicks [revenue]. The Flynn letter was not posted. If you wanted to see the letter you'd have had to clickbait

I called it out

Baker then held off saying they wanted more info

Told the baker I would do that for them

I happily went to Sidney Powells twitter and found the letter and posted

Q later linked to same tweet

We can help good bakers like that.

Give them a hand

But we should be VERY loud about the shitty bakers that are in it for themselves with their 'cutesy' titles that have no relevance to the actual information posted and then solid information cannot be found in search

>>9502559

>it's a side effect of using the buffalo bakers to keep bread going. we use their payroll against them. you want better notables, start baking.

Oh looky here

Imbecile

I can bake

Fuck you and your bakers are god mentality…

see >>9502593

>>9502436

Oh are you sad for being called out for being an idiot

>>9501555

>>9501767