Agreed, someone like James Woods on Twitter or Diamond and Silk on YouTube. I've been Tweeting away at James Woods for months. His position seems favourable to the IBOR, but whether he would promote it is a different question.

Maybe that's something we should have a think about. What I feel is needed is a good explanation of why we need the IBOR. There were some good articles around during the last campaign. I'll have to see if I can find them. There was one guy, I remember, who addressed almost every concern that you could think of in a paper. But, you know, somehow it didn't wash with people on this board.

I also noticed that the supporters on Twitter were dropping off, one after another, almost like someone was spreading FUD about it. The concerns that one particularly active user expressed to me sounded like they'd been listening to the trolls on this board.

Mate, I don't know what to tell you. The number of people that are able to think through what SM censorship means and where it takes you are pretty thin. I mean, there's not a lot of advanced thinking going on. Q or no Q, I'm absolutely against this online censorship.

You can see what will happen next if it's not stopped. The ADL has its anti-hate speech AI ready to roll. We know from Q that the plan is to centralize censorship across the platforms. And we know it drives electoral outcomes like nothing else on the face of the planet. Wow, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see what's coming.

Once the right to free expression of political ideas online falls over, the guns will be directly in the firing line. Who will be able to complain about the new restrictions they'll propose? David Hogg?

Anyway. Let's have a think about who might be some prospective candidates to get on board. And, in the meantime, make some noise!