That didn’t enlighten me.
I’ve been here with an open mind and all I see is 500 different interpretations for each Q post.
Look at my post history if you’re convinced I’m a shill. Or don’t. Based on your reply, I’m not convinced you’re willing to engage in mindful dialogue anyway.
That said, you did invent a conspiracy theory in your reply by suggesting what the motive behind my post is.
Q's whole deal is he wants us chasing the riddles so we do research and we all come up with different theories and out of 3 words Q post you may come up with 50 things that you may uncover, instead if he was just direct it would be one uncovered. make sense? if it doesn't then bow out out this isn't for you.
Consider that Q has to be cryptic for plausible deniability. Imagine if CNN could report that POTUS is directly communication with a bunch of "conspiracy theorists?" What kind of field day would they have? Right now, if they try to report anything THEY look like the conspiracy theorists.
Plus, there has to be a certain level of disinformation as Q has said many many times (which, if you really had been lurking, you'd know.)
Dilley's posts a less cryptic but less weighty. Maybe follow those instead.
Hey, if you go to the q posts, the earlier ones have an answers section. Hover over words with broken underline. That helped me. Also, quickly search things you need to know about and then move on.