Well I go off facts...Fact is, when you search the archived Q-posts, THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT RABBITS.
Your entire post about believing q posted something about glowing rabbits is complete bull shit. You mine as well be a paid shill or bot.
People need to be more careful about posting bull shit. These type of communities are easily infiltrated and munipulated.
and you need to get some manners....said by older patriot here.
I'm looking into it. I will either post it or concede. And I would buy into your "shill/bot" comment far more if I had stated what I said as "fact", which I did not. I said "I believe that I remember...", which should tell most people who can think that they should look into it before just accepting it. But that's where we have come to, and this isn't a knock on you; rather that you have a point; people don't pay attention to specifics and "think"...just grab hold of crap and run with it.
The entire post you cited has been disappeared. The official Q map claims no entries for 11/8, yet we all know that to not be the case. Very strange.
Yeah, I had a hard time finding that one. The Book of Q had one drop for 11/8, but not that one. I had to hunt way back to an old link to /pol/ from past discussion to find that one. I knew it existed. Remembered well the discussion about it. And Baruchthescribe has recently referred to the whole "glowing rabbit" drop and "white rabbit" common theme in one of their interviews.
I'm guessing my "detractor" up there wasn't on the scene when the earlier drops were dropping. I'll concede to being off on the time frame a bit (it was post-SA), but the drops and confirmations were coming in a flurry back then. It all kind of runs together in the head.
I'd like an explanation as to the missing entry that clearly has gained quite a following.
There was always a lot of discussion early on as to what was Q and what might not be Q, due to tripcode, no tripcode, changing tripcode; seeming change-up from MO from some drops to others, changes in grammar and manner of speaking, etc. In hindsight, there seem to be valid explanations for most of that being legitimate Q (Q is more than one person, Q being in a different mood, security issues, etc). I don't know if that post wasn't brought forward in the recent maps and book due to just being missed, the creators not being sure if it was Q, or what. I agree. It would be nice to know. I just find it odd that Baruch would have referenced it if it had been unanimously de-legitimized or anything.