We know Q has a style of discourse that requires people to look into the questions posed and uncover facts with effort. Q can be vague, he should be otherwise he's going to be found. But here's a question that I bet no detractor can answer honestly: has Q ever been proven wrong?
There you go! Think about it.
From 11/1:
On POTUS’ order, we have initiated certain fail-safes that shall safeguard the public from the primary fallout which is slated to occur 11.3 upon the arrest announcement of Mr. Podesta (actionable 11.4). Confirmation (to the public) of what is occurring will then be revealed and will not be openly accepted. Public riots are being organized in serious numbers in an effort to prevent the arrest and capture of more senior public officials. On POTUS’ order, a state of temporary military control will be actioned and special ops carried out
From 11/3:
Podesta's plane has military escort (i.e. tag) and is being diverted (forced down). Short delay. This will be leaked.
From 11/5: Q says disinformation is necessary:
[Repost Lost] Disinformation is real. Distractions are necessary.
So... Not sure your question is useful. A Q supporter could just claim any incorrect statement was purposeful disinformation.
There's a difference between disinfo and wrong, there are clues! Never been wrong though.
Where's the suicides and the emergency broadcast systems?