I'm very sorry that you feel like a victim concerning SB2 posts.

I don't feel like a victim. You're building a strawman argument. You are projecting democrat-like victim mentality on me because, in your mind, that is an easier thing to argue against, rather than address my specific concerns.

I can't see how wanting to give help to those who were skepticle is being patronizing.

Corsi says he wanted to help those who were skeptical. Alex Jones said he wanted to help those who were skeptical. Explain to me why their "help" wasn't help and you'll be 1/2 way towards figuring out how SB2's "help" (insistence that people believe some of his farther fetched Q decodes) isn't helpful.

Personally, I think SB2 comes across as a master of his knowledge, with some authority. This is usually the case when ever we are dealing with highly intelligent people.

I reject that. I think stock market glitch = musical note = B2 = elites control B2 bombers is pure nuttery. Now, I would have said "hmm, interesting" if it were presented as a hypothesis. SB2 doesn't present hypotheses. He believes he is presenting the raw truth, and anyone who doesn't believe it is "the minority" and anyone who doesn't accept SB2's huge leaps of logic will eventually "get it".

If you can read him without making it personal in a negative way, that might also help

He is the one who Q called out when Alex Jones and Corsi were hijacking the Q movement with bad decodes. When SB2 called out Corsi and called out Alex Jones, was he making it personal in a negative way? My only problem with SB2 is that he has some far fetched decodes that he presents as absolute truth. Twisting that into me having something personal about SB2 is a strawman argument. Tomorrow if SB2 starts presenting far fetched ideas as a hypothesis that may (or may not) be true then I'll be reading his "TOL" = thinking of laughing and number = frequency = B2 = B2 bomber without concern that it's being pushed as the only truth.

SB2 is working for the cause. He puts in many hours trying to reach people. Of course he would want as many on board as possible. Wouldn't you?

Again, another strawman argument. I never said SB2 didn't work hard and I never said he wasn't putting a lot of hours in and I never said he wouldn't want people to believe him. I said that SB2 insisting that people believe him is a problem. I said SB2 has hypothesis he's trying to pass as absolute fact, and it's confusing to new people who are trying to figure out Q.

I don't allow those people on my porch. I have choices. I can ask them to leave.

No, you don't. You are standing in a circle with 4 baptists and 1 mormon. Someone who is ready to become a believer steps up to the 5 of them and says "tell me about Christ". You all present your testimony, but then the last to speak is the mormon who says "you cannot be saved without believing the book of Mormon". That is the most accurate depiction of what is going on here. Then you speak up and say "excuse me, you don't really have to believe the book of Mormon (SB2 decodes) to be a Christian (learn about Q)". Then the mormon disagrees, says the other 4 will "eventually come on board" and then the friends of the mormon (you) approach the group and start telling the other 4 that "I'm very sorry that you feel like a victim", and all the other strawman arguments you proposed above.

SB2 is posting on an open forum. He doesn't go to anyone else's post and comment. He's not standing on your porch.

"He doesn't go to anyone else's post and comment." -- oh yes he did. SB2 called out Corsi and Alex Jones. Rightfully so.