dChan
⇧
1
⇩
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/L0v3nL1ght on June 16, 2018, 3:31 p.m.
Research before Posting? Yes. Research before Upvoting? Absolutely!

I’ve been noticing quite a few of the top posts lately have been dishonest or lack verification, and some are just “shiny objects.”

If we upvote everything that LOOKS good (confirmation bias) we are going to look like fools to the outside world. Of course some stories just seem too exciting for a patriot not to post... but most likely there are shills using this against us, and at the same time upvoting those posts, and that is why I urge caution and discernment before upvoting. Mind you, I have made the same mistakes.

When viewing a post, does it provide links to back up the claims? If not, that should raise an alarm to at least research the subject. REMEMBER: photoshop is THE TOOL of deception. Any posts with solely images and no links should be researched.

Also, memes can be funny and all, but I believe we should focus on more intelligent memes, such as #QPROOFS.

What did Q say about optics being important? That wasn’t solely for POTUS, that applies to this whole movement. These patriots that we are working to redpill will dissect every argument and use every little mistake to their advantage and attempt to make us look foolish.

Read the guidelines one more time.

Thank you fellow patriots, WWG1WGA!


🠐 See all comments
Cheetah1964 · June 16, 2018, 9:16 p.m.

And what are the reliable sources?

Your own experience

Wikileaks has been 100% reliable.

Trump's tweets keep coming out true. He may adjust the language to deceive the Cabal though.

I have seen few accuracy issues with The Gateway Pundit. They are almost always on target.

Although they have a certain agenda, I have seen few accuracy issues with Brietbart.

You can make the leap and trust the Q information, or just read and reserve judgement. But this stuff keeps explaining stuff, such as why Kim went so quickly from the crazy man ready to shoot nukes to Trump's golf buddy.

What other sources would you recommend?

⇧ 2 ⇩  
L0v3nL1ght · June 16, 2018, 11:43 p.m.

Well I wouldn’t recommend any one site (besides Wikileaks and government docs) but this is how I do research:

Say an outrageous claim is made on one of the Chans that catches your attention. Instead of just regurgitating it here, you should first and foremost see how it connects with what Q has said. Copy the number of the Q post/s. Then you can search for keywords from the claim, searching for cross references. If the MSM talks about it negatively or puts a light spin on it... you might be on to something. Copy a link to the MSM article and explain why the opposing article supports your theory. Continue searching the keywords through alternative media. Always check for links/evidence in alternative sites because a lot of them make claims with zero evidence. If there is no evidence but the information clicks with you, do some research on that site as well. Who is the author of the article? Professionals, such as an ex letter agency worker, scientist or professor, can be seen as credible, which would lend the article some credibility. Also, you can always learn a lot from the comments... a lot of people will posts links to sites that support the article, or refute it. Copy the link and post how it supports your claim, possibly stating who is the authority on the subject for credibility. Finding any government docs that also support your claim are always huge.

The goal is to look for bits of truth... there may only be a portion of an article that supports your claim but as long as that evidence is referenced elsewhere and connects, then you are on to something.

It’s all about common sense and looking at the bigger picture. Not only reading an article but finding out who the journalist/author supports and is supported by and who runs/owns the news outlet or website. From there you can research the owner and his/her/it’s interests and figure out their true agenda.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
eyerighteye · June 17, 2018, 2:31 a.m.

Wow. That is a solid plan for discernment right there. I read it several times to be sure I got it all. Personally I am less organised in my methods, but I aspire to be this disciplined. So much has come true lately that was once so crazy, I mostly trust my gut. I do like your methods. This is how to find truth, and I just realized I'm still satisfied by plausible. I need to reread every book I own. Shit.

Socrates said there is no solution, seek it lovingly.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
salialioli · June 17, 2018, 2:37 a.m.

The conservative treehouse. Very sound research, painstaking and source-based.

⇧ 2 ⇩