This!
After Q's late night raid it took me 5 hours to track his posts and anon's responses. A synopsis of the last shift's happenings would greatly improve productivity as time catching up is time not spent digging/memeing/red pilling.
>Took me 1/2 hour.
>But sure I would love to spend a bunch of my time creating reports for lazy and slow visitors.
If you have any pro tips for getting through previous threads more efficiently, please share them. It takes me a while because I'm thorough, validate comments/links, take screenshots for later reference, and archive things that are missed. I Get Up Early every day and try to do my part with the 8 or 9 hours I can spare. I think your supposition that the anon that suggested it (>>16710) is lazy or slow is off putting to those of us who don't just skim the threads for amusement. >1/2 hour
>Possibly an EMP to black out NK
Not happening unless they've found a way to contain or focus the EM energy. EMP affects electronics over hundreds, even thousands of miles away. Seoul is far more vulnerable than Pyongyang. Read up on Starfish Prime. It was something to see!
http:// www.businessinsider.com/first-us-test-emp-weapon-2016-11
> write a summary of what you just caught up on
>
>lets see how different each of your accounts of last nights' events are
>
>>my point is , my (or any anons) take on what has happened may be completely different to yours
I agree with both of you. Hence: >>17033
I've been asking for suggestions on reviewing threads for a couple days now. Since leaving half chan, where reading it down in real time highlighting links and comments was possible, 8chan with threads three times as long poses a challenge. I'm playing with tree view to track Q posts and dogging it in real time if I get on early to a thread, but there's got to be a better way.
>So, is Zac talking BS or is he the real deal?
I'm quite familiar with the effects of nuclear EMP, my dad was a physicist in the field and his best friend and colleague worked at a DoD think tank, so if he's talking about nuclear effects, I'd be skeptical.
However this anon >>17263 seems to know something I don't about non nuclear effects. Maybe we'll find out tonight or tomorrow with the Zuma launch. Looks like we might be in for a big MONDAY.
>Wednesday, January 17th, rather than this coming Monday.
Ahhh! He doesn't want to dilute the 8th and/or 16th MONDAY events. Good move.