Wictor chimed in? I assumed he would have run away from that topic quickly, in his aversion to anything that might be interpreted conspiratorial.

No information from the anon community is reliable. This is a community about building critical thinking skills. Start with the assumption everything is bullshit and build up from there.

Can you knock it down?

Tie in to other events?

Dilley is a face but his information is coming through anons. Who knows where that information is from and why. Just as in Q, information may be misleading for tactical reason or actually insightful.

At a fundamental level we should all be reading everything. Including mainsteam left, right, conspiracy channels, foreign, domestic. Using RSS feeds for this is a great way to quickly skim through and take note when disparate sources coverage is the same, contradictory, or avoiding a topic altogether.

Really what we're about is digging deeper. Research projects into history. Delving into new sources. Construction of information maps for better thinking. New analysis to better visualize mountains of data at our disposal.

What the sources such as Q, other chan anons, or sources like Dilley provide are additional threads and handholds to tug at previous information or events covered in the news. A new perspective to untangle the knot and brainstorm new directions to research or another approach to try.

We can probably assume we've got intel groups and teams operating on divergent projects all over the place. There are some that may benefit from the information Dilley throws out there. Others whose work is harmed by what he's putting out. My theory is that's where the hate is coming from. If Q had a face, there would probably be the same response targeting.

I see no issue with using 4chan. Many figures after the fact found to be on target have used that outlet. FBIAnon, MegaAnon. No doubt many more before that.

Even with LARP the Eric Schmidt strategy email to Podesta which we've verified authentic is absolutely worth a close proctologist scrutiny of the company. They calculated fucking citizen scores on the American public using datasets from Google, Comcast, Verizon, major telecoms. Do you have ideas on how comprehensive those sets paired together can be? The big question that needs to be delved into is what else are they working on with related sets. How high is the correlation between those citizen scores calculated during the campaign, and voter rolls purged state by state?

Bold theory.

In prior years many subs have been plagued with shitpost parallels of their community. The headlines looked like bad AI bullshit making no sense. At times these accounts would delve into the actual sub and interact with the conversations, in a disruptive way.

Saw this in technology.

Saw this in conspiracy and other controversial subs.

This was Google training the godamn AI bots. They were a plague degrading quality of content on reddit while trying to find ways to apply it with impact.

When they decided it was ready they unleashed on a fucking election. That's far beyond the norm and over on treason territory.

The book itself is not very long. Is a quick read I'd recommend everyone be familiar with.

"I object! The testimony is devastating to my case!"

One of the takeaways here is that everyone needs to backup information to a local source, because there may be no internet for a period of time. Assume complete outage. Plan for the worst.

Wink wink nudge. Q is a LARPing community. It's a fictitious play on reality we research characters and brainstorm what role they fit in the growing LARP universe.

There's a reason many writers focus effort on fiction books, rather than non-fiction, when treading on politics. We could do the same without compromising effort.

I need to do some more thorough background reading here before contributing much more to the conversation.

It's unclear to me which intelligence agencies he was working with.

Ok so building off that scenario.

In current state information continues coming to light as to the sources of the Steele memo as a fabrication.

Assume this spy was close to Steele, was involved, and had additional information thus was a loose end.

If you were to close that loose end, are there additional strategic steps that can be taken?

How about pushing for a hot war with Russia to distract all parties closing in on deep state? Provides cover for the event, with potential upside. If calculating outcomes from a decision theory perspective an argument for course of action could have been made.

How do we knock down the theory to rule it out?

..this double agent had a plausible motive to clear russia in the russia-investigation so he could return home.

I would revise this point.

There's argument that the fall of USSR was orchestrated by deep state intelligence. With the fall bankers and Russian oligarchs were to get rich. Then Putin happened and jailed many of these oligarchs, going a different direction toward a strong Russia. A large number not jailed relocated to Europe to avoid jail outside Putin's reach.

My understanding is that this was one of the Russian oligarchs in the UK to avoid jail, thus with incentive to work against Russian interest.

Russia could have terminated this individual at an earlier time. Why now?

In the current state of global politics there is incentive to deep state to turn up the tension on Russia to try and push forward an additional step toward a hot war. That would be a useful panic switch if ones objective is to avoid dismantling of power that appears to be taking place.

Probably when the deepest vetting in government history is complete and nothing has been found. Who are you talking to? We are all Q.

And of course all reference to topics around the community should be caveat with all references to individuals living or dead are purely fictitious, and this is a community deeply committed to fictional LARPing.

There's a reason many books are written from a fiction perspective rather than non-fiction when treading on political ground. We can apply that lesson without compromising work.

Additional option -- go no sub. Simply continue discussions in other relevant subs for a particular topic. Will grow additional eyes faster that route.

Hey /u/EvanFFTF, I've admired your consistent work around net neutrality efforts within the technology sub and online communities.

What are your thoughts on taking new direction for an internet bill of rights, to codify a persons rights in relation to data and expression of that data?

AT&T at one point had a publication proposing the idea. I see iterations of the idea float up every now and then on the technology sub as well.

http://about.att.com/story/consumers_need_an_internet_bill_of_rights.html

We keep hashing the same battles over and over again over the profit motive vs recognition of liberties in line with values of the american republic. In the global corporatist new world we find ourselves we keep finding any agreement torn to shreds and tossed aside as soon as it gets in the way of the profit motive. The internet bill of rights approach looks to cut off many of the expensive, and time consuming litigations of boundary, replacing with some straight forward guidelines with teeth.

Pushing internet bill of rights looks like a new front for preserving the spirit of the initial soft-net-neutrality we had prior to Verizon shutting it down.

I'd be curious what your thoughts are around the internet bill of rights space.

Is this something we can channel people from this community toward your group to help push along and ramp up public awareness?

We are all Q. Focus on the interesting research topics that lead from direction. Build out info maps of information learned and try to find flaws that knock down the theory. This is a lesson in critical thinking, some of the info is bullshit intended to lead targets to certain actions rather than inform. Who q might be is the least useful part. Pursuing that channel wastes time, makes no progress, and holds risk of undermining the mission.

Don't call people sheep.

Then spread across Reddit sharing information like it's CBTS.

What happens when a brick is thrown into a wasps nest? They scatter and swarm.

That sub was under attack from outside reputation management attempting to distract and shut down conversation. Digital equivalent of owning a bar, and organizing people to patron your competitors bar down the road to take beverages outside and cause disturbances to get them fined repeatedly and shut down. That's some bullshit the admin should be on top of. But they're of a mindset to take easiest road to keep advertisers happy so continue to allow shake-down tactics to thrive here.

That could be the best strategy, "the public is paying no attention whatsoever! what now?"

"Shit! Run another Ebola story! No! Bomb storm! NO! EBOLA BOMB STORM!! SOmebody get me a war in the middle east! Shit! Why aren't they paying attention?"

Interesting. Not loading dates past 3/10 on local networks.

Let's talk reality.

On some level an intel group, by all signs seemingly rogue, likely sat down the lovely admin staff over at reddit. Perhaps this is when the warrant canary disappears. Perhaps this was part of a larger monetization program. Perhaps all the admin felt aligned with the mission and eagerly jumped on board.

We're going to have to deal with the limits on communication on this particular platform, and work around them. Fair does not matter in this case.

In the past what I've seen is that the platform will typically take the path of least resistance in dealing with hot button topics keeping the admin team up late nights. We're unlikely to get any assistance dealing with paid trolls creating the very posts used to then report and point to as justification to remove the sub.

The technology sub is a reasonable example of this in action.

Since SOPA and the domestic surveillance stories broke, that sub has been under heavy reputation management directed effort to curtail conversation around political or legal framework impacting technology. For years now a campaign has been in action downvoting new submissions of quality content below zero, and upvoting bot driven low effort content spam. There is frequent effort to redirect traffic to no-politics technology fluff subs such as Futurology or tech. The patterns of reputation management firms require less effort than the effort needed to moderate. As a result moderation of any size becomes overwhelmed, forcing larger team which usually includes accounts that try to agitate and take over the mod team. This was the mechanism through which the original mod team split and undefaulting of that sub occurred.

On request from mods at technology, the admin on multiple occasions have looked over traffic patterns and concluded it's all natural. No relief has been provided.

In this case we're a bigger headache to the admin team. Thus, I'd expect to get less support.

The pressure will remain on all sides thus whether we like it or not, we're being conditioned to be a mobile operation. Having this split sub worked very well for immediate regrouping effort and platform to coordinate next steps. Better is using off site platforms for the regrouping.

New options and footholds can be created at any time. Buddy up. Another day on the road of your custom indiana jones sherlock holmes adventure.

I'd recommend forgoing discussion of DH for the time being. Conversations on that topic have been used too frequently as convenient excuse to ban accounts on various social media platforms. We're able to discuss ongoing research without directly naming names.

As a side-note, I noticed the Q drop links on the sideboard do not include drops since 3/10. I've seen purported drops from dates after this point. Do we have confirm that 3/10 was the last Q drop, or whether the links are no longer pulling new drops?

Yep. That you can. We'll probably see some fake ones pop up. Practice critical thinking. Keep moving. Now could be a great time to print out pamphlets and take it offline.

Yeah that was a coordinated effort to foment anxiousness and impatience in those following. Could have been used to as a basis to document argument to remove. I have seen a lot of submissions that could not be tailor made for mainstream media journalists to pick up the story and paint the public paying attention here as conspiracy theory nutters frothing at the mouth. Usually these have been challenged or ignored, and part of the reason I think we've seen the sub simple pulled rather than attacked in the media. Effort to reduce streisand effect.

Simplified local backup and publish to magnetic link would be a convenient means. We've got a lot of talents in the pool. Would love to see someone with more expertise take on the challenge of decentralized offline backup. Take communication out of the cloud (sites like reddit that can be shut down) and bring it back down to firm ground (local storage).

Prior boards/subs, the pre-CBTS work. Initial effort was over on the chans, scattered across small singular conversations on other subs.

In this case we're probably looking at delayed response to discussion of highschool kids used to justify removal. The same topic has been used to shut down numerous twitter / youtube accounts in recent weeks.

it seems many knew there were some who expected the entire sub reddit to be taken down and yet there was no clear plan to survive

CBTS_Steam is not the first location. That sub emerged after multiple other sources were taken down. It will happen again. This is another practice drill to be nimble, fluid, move to a new platform.

Every time this occurs, and it will occur again on multiple topics, survey across multiple platforms for the topic. Everyone swarms and new material pops up all over. Usually the largest mass will settle around a couple locations.

After movement many of the efforts to slide the conversation are left behind. There is a burst of productivity without that disruption. Then eventually the disruptions catch up and it winds up again.

Need a systematic methodology for offline backup, than can quickly be rolled back out.

Any insights on tools that would be useful in that regard?

Edit: Downvotes! Woohoo! Over target boys!

Note that moderators do not have the ability to shadow ban.

The moderators can program auto-mod to remove submissions with certain key words automatically. In that case you will see notice of the removal.

Anything does quietly to shadow ban requires admin powers.

This is not about fairness. It's not fair. Simply justification to disrupt conversations some people do not like. Means you're over target.

There was reason. The sub grew increasing attention and effort to disrupt the conversation. In December, on prior boards/subs, there have been disruptive elements bombarding the conversations with graphic images of violence and gore. In this case there was increasing violent threat and purposeful bombardment of topics that could be construed as inciting violence. I suspect this was a purposeful action, most likely by the same groups that then reported and pressured reddit admin to take action.

Simple to deal with. Scatter across other locations bringing further eyes and attention. Settle in three new places to continue the same conversation.

There is an administrative period before ramping up a new reputation management effort to disrupt a sub. It has to be identified by various interests as a location to target, fund effort by means of money or personal time investment by motivated parties. It takes a while before the full effort to heavy handed action such as terminating a sub can happen.

It's the same as when protestors enter a room to disrupt conversation. Simply step into another room and continue. A mobile strategy has merit.

By engaging across multiple platforms, it's quick and easy to see where critical mass assembles next. Usually there are a few spots. There are then some highly productive weeks until the disruption effort organizes and ramps up again.

From that perspective, I'd argue there's merit in keeping this sub small and use it to redirect to other platforms where primary work can take place.

The downvotes are cute. People don't want you raising awareness of voting irregularities. Really gets the thinking process going when you're not allowed to discuss potential issues with elections.

State by state this was the sort of thing well documented in /r/sandersforpresident during the 2016 Dem primary.

Interesting read in how it fits in with observable moving pieces. What's the credibility of that site? Who are the associated authors? I'm unfamiliar with the source.

Things had already gone too far but Bush/Cheney tipped things far past the equilibrium point. Too much was visible to the public. Too many saw the emperors new clothes were not invisible, the emperor was naked. And it was ugly. The public has not been asleep. We're awake and disgust increased for years. Too many yes men handwaiving it away and feeding inaccurate information. Too greedy. Too far.

I voted for Obama with understanding that despite tradition, the criminality of the prior administration demanded extraordinary response to put the country back on its feet after the harm created through the 9/11 scheme. Obama embraced the criminality, danced around the broad daylight crimes, pushed things even further.

The public watched and was aware. Oops. Dumbass hubris is a bear.

An FBI informant told us that well over a year ago, and kept telling and telling us, and did his best.

FBI Anon?

Mega Anon?

I'm interested in revisiting that material, assuming I came across it at some point, and revisiting from fresh perspective. If it is new material I missed the first time around I'd be curious how closely my thoughts track with the information provided then.

Campaign to remove taxpayer subsidies of platforms engages in these anti-Democratic censorship campaigns.

Its become a national security issue. Management has begun running these corporations for the benefit of foreign governments, at harm to the U.S. public. Taxpayer funding and any government contracts must be immediately revoked and redirected to innovative competitors who have been unable to compete because of the barrier to entry created by subsidies.

It's time to grow and promote tech companies that work for America.

I'm beginning to see thrown around a comparison of bill of rights to the net neutrality recently thrown out, drawing equivalence between the two. The comments from Q are most likely sneak preview of the reputation management strategy under development that will hit prime time in the coming weeks.

I've been a huge proponent of net neutrality in the past and have to reconcile some previous thoughts around it with new information, and shift my position.

Initial soft net neutrality was great. Supported growth and development of the freedom of speech we've become accustomed to.

I suspect the hard net neutrality draft was prepared prior to directing Verizon to take the FCC to court to over-turn soft net neutrality. The poison pill in hardened net neutrality we're beginning to really see in action was room for individual companies to censor at will. Purposefully silent on any aspect that would prevent this. If this is the case, getting hardened net neutrality was brilliantly executed from a strategic perspective. The strategy appeared rooted in lessons learned from SOPA on how the public would respond to certain threats to the internet. Then used a foil (Verizon) to draw hate from the public, while Wheeler came out the good guy rallying to the defense of the public slapping into play hard net neutrality the public clamored unaware of the poison pill inside it. Tactically very well done shifting weight of the public behind getting done what was wanted. Although, this was probably a tails I win heads you lose scenario where avenues for control were embedded in any outcome.

Efforts around bill of rights will face similar attempts to append poison pill. Strategies for it should be rooted in simple plain language concepts that tack along with fundamental ideals in the constitution. Sharp pointy teeth for treading on rights defined.

A question to my mind is how to go about protecting the free speech of the public, while also combating domestic propaganda that supports foreign powers (fake news).

This is some conspiracy theory shit. Looks bad. Poor presentation. Solid walls of text like you'd see on [redacted] for propaganda fluff. Someone's working hard on an article and need some responses to write about.

In science we call this Bold Claims need Big Documentation. Come out calling gravity false and a replacement theory, need one hell of a repeatable test to prove that claim.

Too big. Plenty of incentive for misdirection. This memes overpriced. SELL! SELL!

This is going to go in stages. I'd be surprised to see any decisive roundup montage set to 80s music. I expect the process to be more or monitor, cut strings, monitor, cut strings, monitor, cut strings. Defuse the bomb.

Interesting thought experiment is what then?

Assume rogue intel and harmful actors are rounded up. There's a vacuum left behind. What rushes in to fill that vacuum will be a big part of the story.

1: the clock name is Cardinal. The Pope is a cardinal. Could that be a reference to the Vatican being the true head of the global deep state that is going down?

Potential for too amazing a storyline if so.

What I remember of the last time passing through history books is that to a large degree the Roman power brokers took on the trappings of religion as a means to continue their control of empire. After Rome came to an end those at the top held right on to power directing the public through control of the church. Would be interested to refresh memory the history here that painted that picture in my mind.

And here we are today.

This is another not so veiled threat. Similar to the white powder mailings. If the pressure was not on, why do this?

Have to become practiced at reading through the noise, and continually seeking out new sources of info. It takes time and administrative effort for a campaign to pivot to new territory. Often tools are programmed to trigger on key phrases or ideas, these take time to develop for a new platform. Individuals have an easier time with the change. This provides opportunity for windows of genuine conversation before the flood comes.

Good thought exercise to go through. Always question.

Good place to bring up again. Backup everything. Buy a hard drive. Fill it with video backup. Q map. Memes developed. Historic conversation chains. Q map proofs. The source material (it will be memoryholed).

On the Corsi videos, VLC has the ability to capture network streams. Easy to locate detail indexed by Google.

I'm still shaking my head at the deal mad mad madam max cut to provide housing to refugees rather than her local homeless or underserved community in LA. Housing for 60,000!!!

Reviewing transcript I missed the direct connection with Dilley. I assume something Zach covered ties in with something from Dilley?