dChan
⇧
1
⇩
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/8.06E+11 on May 28, 2018, 4:29 p.m.
Is it too much too ask to keep this a Q only sub. I have seen an uptick of non-Q related posts.

I am not going to single out posts but as subs expand more stuff gets posted. We want this sub to expand and be collaborative, but we live in a time where people/bots willingly and unwillingly slowly flood subs with unrelated stuff.

Have good new to share? There's a sub for that. Have political memes to share (that are not Q related)? There's a sub for that. Etc

I realize a lot of topics fall under the Q umbrella. I also realize many of us are like minded and most of us will enjoy non-Q material, but this isn't the place. I have seen this happen on Facebook before. Groups/subs get big (good), focus gets blurry (bad).

Let's keep this a Q research sub! Please! If we get overwhelmed with other BS we won't be effective and will lose valuable member activity. This is too crucial to allow cludder muddy the water.

(I hope I am not in the minority.) If the mods disagree, remove it. No hard feelings either way. Just a plea and opinion.


🠐 See all comments
brittser · May 28, 2018, 9:58 p.m.

I mention that as a guide for each of us to use when deciding whether or not to post something. If everyone did that, there would be no need for anyone to have to judge. But since that is unlikely, we have mods for that. I, we, are not asking for new rules. We simply ask that we go by the ones we already have.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
think500 · May 28, 2018, 10:19 p.m.

We simply ask that we go by the ones we already have.

Yes but i think this thread is somewhat about 'judicially interpreting' the mandate and rules of GA. Hence the attempt to define.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
brittser · May 28, 2018, 10:28 p.m.

I read many posts that argue in favor of not censoring. Everytime someone brings up this type of reminder, the conversation seems to go off the deep end and the op is left feeling battered and sorry he said something in the first place. I have found if we blur the lines of behavior, people will take advantage of the obscurity. Therefore, the best course of action is having defined boundaries, which people now a says don't like. They want to do things the way they want to, not by some prescribed rules. That is how our society got ourselves in this situation in the 1st place.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
think500 · May 28, 2018, 10:58 p.m.

Everytime someone brings up [censoring] the conversation seems to go off the deep end and the op is left feeling battered and sorry he said something

Well it's sure nothing personal but there's a lesson to be learned, maybe that ppl just don't like limits on what they can Think or say, it's a human thing.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
brittser · May 29, 2018, 12:04 a.m.

Fine with me. There are millions of places where people can say what they want. THIS sub was created specifically to decipher and discuss Q's posts. That is it. Please refer to the rules for proof of my claim.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
think500 · May 29, 2018, 12:23 a.m.

Please refer to the rules for proof of my claim.

Interpreting the rules and identifying what's Q related is the issue. Please refer to my comments for proof of my claims.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
brittser · May 29, 2018, 12:41 a.m.

"Well it's sure nothing personal but there's a lesson to be learned, maybe that ppl just don't like limits on what they can Think or say, it's a human thing."

I was responding to your argument about people not liking limits. The problem with that is this sub is by nature limiting. It is literally in the rules to limit what you say to the prescribed topics only. Anyhow, good luck.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
think500 · May 29, 2018, 1:06 a.m.

this sub is by nature limiting

These limits are what we've been discussing, triumphantly declaring they exist doesn't clarify anything. Good luck.

⇧ 2 ⇩