/qhaos/ - dARQhaos

>your cult is stupid

It is certainly confirmed that there are cults using this movement.

But you are just saying it is a cult.

This is from explaining the matters of those who are doing cultic deeds.

Or, please clarify the circumstances in which you can confirm the cult-like behavior.

Q: ‘Expand your thinking’

Is it conceivable that you were duped by the imposter?

You experience being cheated and all you do next is complain?

Is that constructive?

>>171

Conclusion.

choice/select point?

Q: What are the real problem/questions?

Critical thinking: Basic Word:For everything, so what?

Q: 'Define evidence'

Are learning results included?

Does the content matter?

What is its content based on?

Does the direction of the content matter?

Does purpose and intent matter?

At what point can the purpose and intent be confirmed?

追記

例として、

時々辻褄の合わないという風に他者に言う者がいる。

これは両方に辻褄(論理/理論)を明確にさせなければならないと思う、そして結論を見ない限り不明な点も出てくる。

例えば意図してdisinfoを使用しているという場合、その理由は何故か？

何故必要なのか？

何故重要なのか等を質問をする。

この様に質問をしていけば自ずとその者が何を考えてその行為に至っているかを確認する事に繋がると考えます。

無論、既に言動に矛盾が生じている場合は指摘されて当然ではあると思いますが、この指摘に対しても明確な論理が必要になり重要になるのではないのでしょうか？

まあこの様に言うと今度はその時間が勿体無いと言い訳をするかもしれません。

思考時間を奪う策略だと言うかもしれません。

その場合には更に説明責任の妥当性を伝えてみる事が必要になると思います。

それでも話しにならず、論理も使えないのであれば議論するに値しないのではないのでしょうか？

>((()))は質問されたくない？

であれば、直接的に話すのではなく、その特定の問題に対しての理論を投稿する事は論理的な思考を続ける機会を作り出す事にも繋がり建設的な方向へと連想や追考の連鎖が続いていくのではないのでしょうか?

歴史はどの様に作られてきたのでしょうか？

言葉が発展していない場所では壁画に絵を描き何があったのかを伝えてきたのではないのでしょうか？

それは思想や考え、想いなどを遺し繋げる為に描いたのではないのでしょうか？

そしてその様な何かを残そうとしてきた者達がいるから今があるのも関係しているのではないのだろうか？

((()))が記録を残したくない、隠したい理由とは？

その説明はどこまで妥当であり建設的ですか？

妥当点はどの時点ですか？

それは何に基づきますか？

聞けば聞くほど明確になりますか？

矛盾点に目を瞑る行為でさえも、、、

>>181

>歴史はどの様に作られてきたのでしょうか？

>言葉が発展していない場所では壁画に絵を描き何があったのかを伝えてきたのではないのでしょうか？

>それは思想や考え、想いなどを遺し繋げる為に描いたのではないのでしょうか？

>そしてその様な何かを残そうとしてきた者達がいるから今があるのも関係しているのではないのだろうか？

Q: 'Expand your thinking'

歴史を遺すのに辺り最も重要な可能性や必要な環境とは？

8kunが重要な理由とは？

Qのoriginalの投稿がある空間は歴史的に遺すべき？

Anonsのlogは重要？or 建設的？

残しておく事は建設的？

Think: 'Biblical'?

例として仮にイエス本人の手記が存在した場合にそれは重要？(比較/分析においても)

>>216

The screenshot posted on deep digs and the poster here are not identical.

The person who posted that screenshot is not related to the qhaos contributor.

Why would they do such a thing?

Could the impact/effect create another chain of events?

>>218

kek. just curious whats going on here.

>>245 add.

>They don't even seem to be able to exist in the dark.

and/or

They can't seem to hide in the dark.

>>246

Or can't even recognize the dark?

Does dark matter exist?

What is the correct definition?

>>264

[psych 101][echo-chamber][group think]

'If majority thinks XYZ - XYZ must be true'

- Q

Coordinated XYZ?

>>265

Victory by any means necessary.

Is truth and true justice not the most constructive way to triumph over means-tested opponents/deception?

And as a reflection or cause and effect.

In other words, is not the ultimate truth and true justice coming?

Very simple.

It is very easy to feel free and comfortable.

All you have to do is control your mind.

It is also easy to see inconvenience as freedom.

The degree of happiness will also vary from individual to individual.

The question is, does that own choice of freedom infringe on the freedom of others?

And what impact or chain of events does it create?

If clarify these issues, won't the best choice naturally emerge?

Why they making obscure moves?

Because they don't want to make the issue intelligible.

They even erase or hide the problem.

So let's just clarify a lot of things.

We already have a place to pursue and clarify the facts.

>>272

All you have to do is think for yourself and leave what you think is good.

There is no need for groupthink.

Don't those who still want to control just want to control free thinking?

Have those forming the group offered a reason or benefit for going to the trouble of groupthink?

And are they working efficiently?

>>275

This is a question for those deliberately promote blindness.

Is the 'Q' question a blind direction?

Or is it a light direction?

>>272 Add.

This means that the pursuit of true freedom may reveal the best choice.

>>278

Does the lack of clarity about freedom lead to the creation of crippling effects?

Even if it's not just a matter of freedom.

Is it possible that blindness to the many problems that already exist could lead to the creation of inconvenience?

>>279

Hmm?

Now it will be a problem again if it becomes active?

I are just talking about freedom in this world?

>>281

Since the watch is also controlled by the patriots, does that mean that those being controlled are labeled as bad guys?

>>267

>Repeated use of images that have been passed around?

This is a question for those who intentionally encourage silence.

If you come here and think there is something wrong with it, go ahead and post it.

>>282

This problem may be caused by technology issues or even by the device or browser are using.

This is about intended decoration masquerading as control by patriots.

>>286 edit.

>"information warfare"

And how can one call someone a patriot who abandons legitimate debate and engages in technical attacks?

^This is not about actions against animals that have lost their rationality.

>>292

This means that transparency will expand and progress.

Does that mean that what is unclear is proven to be unclear?

Isn't the important thing here to clarify what is unclear?

Questions about what is said in a free speech space are an inevitable part of the process.

And accountability will also occur.

言論の自由の空間であろうとなかろうと自身の言動に責任に生じる事は必然的で常識的な事ではないのだろうか？

>>297

>言論の自由の空間であろうとなかろうと自身の言動に責任に生じる事は必然的で常識的な事ではないのだろうか？

Isn't it inevitable and common sense to take responsibility for one's own words and actions, whether in a free speech space or not?

^>>>299

Oh, you can't speak, so you're spamming?

Or is it useful information?

Hmm I am not a technology person so I am hesitant to open this URL.

Please post a clear reason for what you have posted here and the contents of the URL you posted with an image.

Otherwise this URL will be removed.

This is not a place for minors, right?

^This is for those who are unable to clearly communicate their thoughts.

>>300

If you think this URL is really informative please post it again.

delete this(299) post.

To what extent can clarify the statement, the idea, the validity, the effectiveness and the constructiveness of the statement or idea?

Does clarifying the problem lead to the best choice?

Can small action fixes lead to big fixes?

Like lean or smart movements.

Or a reasoned move, for example.

Think that would eventually lead to MORAL or something like that.

The impact arising from the choice.

>>305

An old lady was carrying a heavy load.

This caused many people to wait.

So I helped her carry her bags, and she didn't have to carry heavy bags and didn't get hurt while carrying them.

And the people who had been waiting for old lady didn't have to wait for anymore either.

A very simple, real-life experience.

Critical Thinking.

Basic Word.

[So what? So?]

And what point are trying to connect?

Indeed, it is difficult to swallow spit once it has been spit.

Isn't it therefore important to change our minds and make improvements?

What is the essence of the 'Q'movement?

History does not repeat itself?

After all, this place seems to work well.

Why did 'Q' choose 8kun?

What is possible with 8kun?

What is the outside platform?

What is the use of the outside platform?

What are the benefits gained from an outside platform?

Deliberate?

Why did do it intentionally?

Where do connect the dots?

I think currently working under fair conditions.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

>>310

Currently, I have not created a situation where people cannot speak out.

>>311

No questions.

^Is this a deal?

>>310, >>311

This talks of cause and effect and chains of events in the world.

Where is the current environment already conducive to expanding Freedom Speech?

So is it not important to give importance to the environment?

Of course, we all have individual strengths and weaknesses, and things that are constructive or effective.

In this case, I think it is important to clarify the actions that will maximize one's own strength and lead to results.

Of course, the outcome could be good or bad depending on individual perspectives.

But isn't the most effective way to Vote, i.e., post the results of learning and research, the most effective example we can currently do, and the most important thing to do?

So where is the most effective or efficient environment in which to make these vote i.e, drop/post?

And what is the essence of the drop/post(archive/record)

Where is the best place to expand freedom?

Q: 'SILENT MAJORITY NO MORE'

>>313

And conversely, there is no more reason for silence.

What is the reason for your symbolism?

>>315

Or what is the reason for using that symbol?

>>315, >>316

Isn't the problem of symbolism ultimately about how treat symbols?

A good example would be, for example, that buying a symbolic object will save your life.

Or, by worshipping symbols, they create a cult-like, closed groupthink.

From another point of view, I have recently felt that there is symbolism in which the use of a certain symbol is treated as symbolism.

I think that if pursue the question of what is the problem and clarify the reason, the true problem will become clear.

However, I feel that symbolists often do not clarify the reasons for their actions, or imply that they condone worship or dogma-like conditions.

To sum up, they don't want to articulate evil.

Because it would reveal the harm and the real problem.

Did 'Q' see symbolism as a problem?

Why did 'Q' see it as a problem?

>>319

I could see this coming.

The construction of a new dogma.

The construction of a new cult.

An ideology that creates delays in the clarification and clarity of things.

I thought about the risk of getting my post deleted or banned if I say the opposite at yours place.

>>319 edit.

>Let me tell you one of the reasons I built this place.

This is the embodiment of what I have learned.

If your theory is correct, it seems that God is with me.

Or is everything but your god a demon?

It's always the same logic!

>>324

Let's continue with further logic here!

Which of us is capable of miraculous events?

Which one is worthy of a 'sign'?

[ENOUGH IS ENOUGH]

So what?

Is it 'WWG1WGA' to be your follower and wait for your word to come out?

>>326

Do things weigh differently for each individual?

>>328

All along - the questions and logic are following you.

Don't you see that?

>>329 clarify.

>All along - the questions and logic are following you.

<This is not a statement to DJT.

invisible enemy

This point: thought.

>>332

>>332

Let's expand thinking with a few more examples.

They suspect you are a thief even though you did not commit the theft.

What is the right or constructive move in this case?

Wouldn't that be a clear and unequivocal assertion that they are not stealing?

Isn't this necessary not only for one's own protection, but also to make sure that those who really steal are held accountable?

>>334

If you are silent here, even if you yourself 'forgive' those who stole from you, can this act be called justice?

There may be cases where such good intentions work well.

But is it not also possible that these good intentions can give rise to new evils?

What is the most constructive choice?

Isn't it important to clarify some things firmly even in 'forgiveness'?

Then the real problem can be identified and there is a chance for real improvement?

Of course, are talking about possibilities.

It is possible that the mistake will be repeated again.

But won't the revelation of some things increase the likelihood that can prepare for them and prevent them from happening again?

And I think it is also necessary for building a better future.

This is not to say that should monitor each other.

If notice trash on the ground, wouldn't it be constructive to pick it up?

In the same way, if notice a problem, I think that raising a remedy or issue for that problem will lead to improvement.

What would happen if information were to come out that would eliminate a particular religion?

What would happen to those who believed in that religion?

This is just one example.

How far does the impact extend?

Don't think only of yourself.

>>336

What impact will actions have?

What impact will the action lead to?

Does the creation of a possibility mean that it is occurring in another dimension?

Is it a ‘desire’ to pray for someone's pain to go away?

Is wishing for world peace a ‘desire’?

>>338

Do you know why I don't go directly to your catalog?

How many possibilities can think of that arise from what drop?

Does using the same photo over and over again change the facts of the photo?

What is the first priority in revealing them?

It is not to worship you as a savior.

What kind of ‘desire’ is it to claim to be a savior?

>>341

Anyone can claim to be a savior.

And showing a ‘sign’ does not make you a savior.

It is what you accomplish or try to accomplish that counts.

>>342

So what are you proving?

I already embody it.

As an example?

What function does this catalog or one similar to it serve?

>>341

What would have happened if '45' not become '47' this time?

What was the damage to the people&World.

Haven't we already been given so much by MAGA?

Do you think about that before you make your statement?

When all you think about is yourself, it's inevitable that you won't pay attention to others, right?

It is inevitable that if you think only of yourself, you will not care about others.

Even for free, it is difficult to understand others.

>>342

Do not mistake the essence of what denying.

Have you proved that DOGMA is legitimate?

What is your reason for not proving them?

Have you answered your accountability?

If the world could change by repeating the same ideology, the world would have changed long ago.

Then what has changed?

Have the numbers changed?

What do we do after we worship you?

Ex?

Survivors of Doomsday Starvation Cult Testify Against Pastor and 93 Associates

An evangelical pastor in Kenya ordered his flock to shun education and medicine and starve their children to death in order to meet Jesus, witnesses in a manslaughter trial said.

>>346 Add.

source >https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/19/world/africa/kenya-doomsday-cult-trial.html

>>349

>Could it ever be absolutely safe?

Of course, this comes with the reply that there are no absolutes.

Therefore, isn't it important to always keep in mind to ‘reform’, to update, to deal with problems and not to create them?

Therefore, I think that critical thinking and criticism create opportunities for improvement.

>>351

Do those who lament dissent and critical thinking suffer from denial?

Are they afraid that their own legitimacy will be damaged by the denial of their own actions?

^Hmmm(Question)

If you have are justification in what you do, you can continue to prove it.

Then why don't (((they))) try to clarify their justification?

※((())) = harm mark.

Why did ‘Q’ mention outside platforms?

Why is 8kun important?

Tracking level?

Does the level of personal identification vary by platform?

What is the importance of Q+ANONYMOUS?

Intentionally induce them to make mistakes?

Don't think only of yourself.

Is anonymity related to freedom of speech?

Even if you had 100 million followers?

So what?

Does that make your statement correct?

What have you learned from MAGA history?

Tired of eating POTATO.

>>357

Of course, there may be times when a correctly evaluated number will reflect this.

So what?

>>358

What comes next, what is the critical thinking?

When will you clarify your answer to that?

How many years have passed since this movement began?

This include what I have tried and experienced by participating in this movement.

>>348

When a religion becomes toxic, does it become a cult?

Is the cult related to Dogmatic/Symbolism?

What are the reasons why these occur?

Are there behaviors that make cults?

Is there a relationship between the religious system and culticization?

What are the chain/effects of blind adoration?

>>360

What is the legitimacy or constructive impact of worship?

How can avoid blindly worshipping something in particular?

Why do (((they))) dislike clarity?

Is being blind easy to control?

Is 'Q' positive/negative about dogma/symbolism?

If negative, does the act of encouraging dogmatic behavior or symbolism in spite of having joined this movement tarnish it or create delay in its expansion?

>>360 edit.

>culticization

cult

>>>/qresearch/22442830

I think each individual should say what they feel and counter-theory.

I think that this will give us a chance to arrive at the truth if can identify many improvements and problematic points for the things have identified as problematic.

I think the resolution of the problem will go up.

On the other hand, I think there will be those who do not want to clarify the problem, and then there will be an opportunity to shed more light on new problematic activities.

Doing my own research is my top priority, but if I get tired of killing time on YouTube, I think it would be constructive to countertheory.

>>>/qresearch/22443011

I think that 8kun, QR, and the ANONYMOUS system are the most suitable places where this can be done.

I consider a post to 8kun a vote for 8kun.

When this is moved to Twitter, etc., it creates a situation like an attack from the identification of individuals.

This creates a witch-hunt-like situation.

Of course, I would say that making mistakes and being hunted or boomeranged for making mistakes is self-inflicted, but I think people who find this kind of thing frightening will be silenced.

Hence, I believe anonymity is important.

The other day Anon said that the Twitter system is lagging behind, and I agree with him.

Anonymity is one of the systems that make 'excuses for silence' impossible.

>>363, >>356

Repeat theory.

Create new symbols?

Even the President had one ear.

Would you say others are absolutely safe?

>>364

What is saving the world without thinking of the weak?

What do now?

Outside Platformers.

Where you connect the dots is important.

>>365

An example of a thought.

Outside Platformers.

follower get > After that?

Get numbers(followers) > After that?

What are the dots connected to?

What have you already connected the dots to?

What did you connect the dots to?

>>366

Dogma/Symbolism will be their downfall.

>>379 edit

> I do that in order to give you early access to the results of our research.

Wrong posting thread.

Have ever thought about how much impact a single image selection can have?

>>388

Why not do that when they already have space exist(or can be made) to prove they own legitimacy and claims?

What is the reason?

Or do you care about the number of likes, followers, etc.?

How many followers or numbers do need to get to be at the best time?

How long will it take to gather those numbers?

Q: 'This is not another 4-year ELECTION'?

What constitutes unity?

Do words and actions matter?

Trust can be lost in an instant.

Is that because the act was deemed to be a breach of trust?

On what basis is it determined?

Does the degree of favoritism or dislike of another person matter?

Does a higher percentage of favoritism allow for a bit of betrayal of trust?

Or does it depend on the content?

And is it not important what has been accomplished that is conclusively the trustworthiness of the individual?

(word/action/phenomenon)

Does aversion affect trust?

In light of all this, isn't it important to clarify and preserve one's own thoughts?(Comparison and contrast)

So would you choose a location where there is a risk of losing the logs in that case?

(There is risk in all of them)

(Would choose a place with a high degree of censorship or speech control?)

(Is there a strategy to hide the log by daring to choose it?)

(Anonymity is one of the systems that make 'excuses for silence' impossible)

Does the process of clarifying your thoughts affect your credibility if a problem comes to light?

Is anonymous(Q+trip IDEN)proof effective in such cases?

Is it constructive/effective to prove what have learned from this movement?

(At what point does it become a distraction?)

This point includes talking about blind following and DOGMA.

Easier said than done?

Now, will the next move be on 2/2?

To Doppelganger.

Proof of Negation.

>>407

See, it moved.

>>408

Denial of parallelism.

I direct the existence of the individual.

Q: 'Hold the line'

This I consider the best concentration of individuals.

>>409

This is not a game.

I do not play games.

Shall you continue with the riddle?

I am serious about making a counter.

>>410

Of course, the only counters are the funny ones.

Dogma and symbolism are obvious examples, no?

Were not 'Q' negative about those?

Isn't it inevitable that any move that affirms them will create an opening and be poked at?

If affirm dogma/symbolism, could it lead to tarnishing this movement?

Create a deliberate contradiction?

Don't contradictions keep people away from joining this movement?

That's why create a counter to advance clarity.

Do you consider them games?

These refer to what is happening in the 8kun these days.

Of course, these are my observations.

Specifically, from impersonation to new symbols, etc.

For this purpose, we are creating a Word that will serve as a COUNTER.

>>412 edit

>For this purpose, we are creating a Word that will serve as a COUNTER.

For this purpose, I creating a Word that will serve as a COUNTER.

Does it make a difference whether you are playing a game or taking it seriously?

>>368

>>414, >>410

Q: 'This is not a game'

As an example, consider the name of a catalog.

Catalog names cannot be the same.

In other words, if someone else wants to use that name, they cannot use that name.

Therefore, I think that those who use the name of that catalog will have a responsibility to do so.

This is because it also includes the wishes of those who wish to use the catalog name for other purposes.

Add another example.

Consider @name.

You can't use the same name.

If the performance of @name varies depending on the user, then it is up to the user to decide whether the @name lives or dies.

I think that just as a country changes depending on who the president.

Isn't it possible that depriving others of the opportunity to perform?

This uses the catalog name as an example, but what is important here is that I talking about the weight of one's own words and actions.

>>412, >>413, >>414, >>415

And again, if you think this situation is like a game, that is very disheartening.

I see it as an insult to those who take it seriously.

If you think this movement is just about gathering followers for you, isn't it inevitable that there will be a counter from those who are serious about it?

What kind of desire is it to collect numbers?

Is it constructive to 8kun?

Is it constructive to this movement?

Have you revealed them?

Or is it just proselytizing your religion?

If are going to use 8kun, isn't constructive action on 8kun a necessity?

If value 'Q' in the same way, isn't constructive action against this movement important?

If I am wrong, by all means let's talk.

But that won't happen either.

The discussion never progresses, and just goes on saying what likes.

It's just like TV(propaganda?)

So created this space so as not to interfere with the research.

To be able to pursue discussions and statements.

Contradictions and problem/questions arising from themselves will follow you wherever you go.

Even in various forms that do not see.

This is one of the pains I have felt and experienced in this movement.

My enemy is the invisible enemy/problem.

This is not a game - Q

What is transparency?

Your 'it' has just been proven.

Is it caused by someone else?

Is that constructive?

What did you do it for?

To what extent does transparency apply?

Coordinate?

The word "transparency" is out there.

Don't do it.

Well, I guess that will stay too.

>>417 add.

>Don't do it.

On acts contrary to truth and transparency.

What are the consequences or chain of events that would result from doing so?

>>417

>Coordinate?

or Decoration?

Make it look that way?

Proof of Negation.

>>418 & 417 edit.

> Don't do it.

< It is better not to.

Differences in nuance.

At what point is transparency necessary/unnecessary?

Is there a possibility that a necessary/unnecessary action could lead to the creation of another impact?

Exposing faces and names gets a brave man a patch?

Does the batch fulfill your self-esteem?

What lies beyond that?

What constructive action is really needed?

As an example, I think that actions that encourage 8kun will expand and protect transparency and freedom of speech.

or Does protecting anonymity lead to protecting or expanding free speech and transparency?

Is this a direction that condones symbolism?

Letting symbolism be tolerated and worshipped?

These issues speak to a direction that deprives people of the opportunity to act blindly and think for themselves.

'Q' is not a symbolism.

What does it mean to follow the money?

Clarify the form of desire?

That is where you want to be with the truth.

It is already over.

You have not read my post.

How was faith created?

A desire to believe?

The closer you get, the stronger the reflection will be.

.

>>422

Is this an intentional attempt to lower the image power?

If one is justified by the facts of the past, is it justified even if one's conduct in the present moment is evil?

I sent you a message.

Despite your participation in this movement, is it possible that your words and actions that are inconsistent with the ideas of this movement could affect the expansion of this movement?

Is it possible to undermine this movement by dogma-ing it as an example?

Or, does it undermine it?

Is the reason you want to dogmaize it so that people don't have to think for yourself?

Didn't Q encourage people to think for yourself?

Your (((source))) seems to me to be dogma-like and symbolism.

How does it work legitimately or constructively?

I want this movement to be on a global level.

Therefore, I do not think that a action like ((())) is constructive.

You do not speak to me directly,

This space exists to include the possibility of this happening.

I'll tell you this much,

I tried every single thing you did and had better results than you. (I'm talking as of this moment).

But they have all been hidden by censorship, etc. (about outside platform)(about outside 8kun)

Now you want to repeat that time again?

Are we going to taste the risk of having that time erased?

I am talking about the importance of personal time.

Of course, I am not saying that there is no risk in 8kun.

We are just saying that it is the most constructive space to consider all possibilities.

>>423 edit.

>We are just saying that it is the most

<I just saying that it is the most.

Religion v religion = dogma v dogma?

This is not to say that religion is bad.

I am talking about action.

I am talking about the point of focus.

>>423

Think further.

For example, would linking from YouTube or Twitter/X to 8kun increase the likelihood of getting people to 8kun?

So if you do the opposite, you are taking people outside the 8kun?

Changing patterns.

If this is the Tiger Network, does this increase the likelihood of a return to 8kun?

I am also looking for what might be constructive or effective.

Do you have any justification left?

Do you just want to increase the number of followers?

Do you increase the number and focus on legitimacy and symbols?

Is it labeling to offer an opinion or question about someone's deeds or mistakes?

Is dissenting opinion gaslighting?

Maybe 'you' is more correct than just 'yours'.

>>421, >>427

Think further.

Connect further.

Example.

Is there any difference between a MAGAHAT purchased from the official DJT website and a MAGAHAT from Another place?

Does the flow of money change depending on where the purchase is made?

Example.

I will try to justify using this movement to make money.

^Does the flow of money matter in this case?

So what are the important follow-up points?

Doesn't it matter where you connect the dots?

Do false directions exist?

If join this movement, isn't it important to connect this movement to a constructive/effective point?

Proof of Negation.

Counter Occurrence.

You started it, didn't you?

What (((source))) are you leaving?

What did you prove?

I have made it clear that I am not the original 'Q'

The closer you get, the stronger the reflection will be.

Consider this movement.

I think this movement has proven to be a lot more constructive/effective.

However, on the other hand, I think that many events that undermine or conflict with the movement have appeared on the contrary.

In this case, if there is a lot of information that discredits this movement, is there a possibility that the number of participants in this movement will decrease or that there will be a delay in its expansion?

So what are some constructive/effective actions that those of us who have joined this movement can take to help it?

Wouldn't it be one of the constructive/effective actions to prove that individuals have learned from this movement?

What are the properties of breadcrumbs?

If you do 'Q' does that make you responsible for your actions?

(Not just talking about doing 'Q')

How does clearly stating that you control others prove anything?

Does impersonating another person prove it?

Is the purpose of this movement to use this movement to control others and make them follow you?

At what point does it become propaganda?

The act of continually pushing a convenient point of view?

How to improve it?

Is it constructive/effective to articulate a clear response or validity?

Q: The GREAT AWAKEning ('Freedom of Thought’), was designed and created not only as a backchannel to the public (away from the longstanding ‘mind’ control of the corrupt & heavily biased media) to endure future events through transparency and regeneration of individual thought (breaking the chains of ‘group-think’), but, more importantly, aid in the construction of a vehicle (a ‘ship’) that provides the scattered (‘free thinkers’) with a ‘starter’ new social-networking platform which allows for freedom of thought, expression, and patriotism or national pride (the feeling of love, devotion and sense of attachment to a homeland and alliance with other citizens who share the same sentiment).

When ‘non-dogmatic’ information becomes FREE & TRANSPARENT it becomes a threat to those who attempt to control the narrative and/or the stable.

When you are awake, you stand on the outside of the stable (‘group-think’ collective), and have ‘free thought’.

"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.

This is my proof.

What do you prove?

If you have experienced harm in your own experience, isn't it necessary to avoid or prevent the occurrence of the same harm?

And conversely, isn't it natural to a reasonable response when someone claiming to be 'Q' shows up?

How many problems have emerged since this movement began and those who call themselves 'Q' have emerged?

(How many more sauces are there?)

How many people who claimed to be 'Q' have turned away participants from this movement?

This movement has spread around the world.

Therefore, there has been a lot of conflict.

I am leaving my words here to put an end to them.

I too value this movement.

That is why I write here the Word against the idea of 'Q' and ideas that contradict the Word.

If I am wrong, please prove it.

Please point it out.

That way can see further best, right?

Or do you still want to play riddle-mystery?

I'll give you a word back.

HAHAHA!!!

Labeling if there is disagreement

Always.

You are incapable of dialogue.

I have created an opportunity for dialogue here.

Do you think you can post in a dogma environment place ?

Can you post in a symbolism environment?

It would be a pain in the ass if it was unintentional and you were banned.

>>430 edit.

>me were banned.

Does DOGMA lead to racism?

Why is the Q+anonymous style important?

How does it work against dissenting opinions?

Dogma/Symbolism.

Does blind worship(follow) lead to dogma/symbolism?

Are there actions that lead to them?

The problem of behavior that tries to get people to worship blindly versus behavior that blindly worships(follow)?

What is NOT blind action?

Clear words and actions?

Does clear action lead to the possibility of creating further clarification?

Is the Q+anonymous style/form constructive/effective in clarifying things?

'Transparency brings accountability'?

You are willing to pursue those who are considered wicked.

Your even say you enjoy it.

But when you are pursued, you immediately complain.

And escape pursuit.

This refers to talking about ask about questions, etc.

Isn't it therefore important to clarify the reasons, etc.?

It's convenient to demand accountability from others and escape accountability oneself.

As you say, I am talking about an invisible enemy (problem/question).

I am speaking against those hide.

It is the realm of thought.

When did I reveal (((source)))?(HAHAHA)

I've always seen how revealing face and name makes a victim this time.

That's why I think the Q+anonymous style/form is important.

Don't you think that if mankind looked at the problems that have arisen in this world and acted to improve them, good deeds would spread?

I am of the opinion that the pursuit of truth finds the best/good. (Expanding Happiness?)

Abrahamic Family House.

^Despite the fact this such ideas already exist, dogma-like behavior and symbolism are old hat.

Do you still want to call yourself Christ, Buddha, etc. and control them?

Is that not the so-called old Playbook?

What is the reason for the religious wars?

Conflict of justice?

The problem with those who want us to remain blind & those who want to remain blind?

Why is history repeating itself?

Does the choice to repeat history exist?

>>433 edit

>old hat

<old theory

Certainly it may have made sense to rely on dogma and symbols for control throughout history.

But what happened as a result?

And what might happen anew?

Is it a temporary solution?

Also, is creating a new star and worship situation really constructive/effective for the betterment of the world?

And doesn't it have to prove not only pedigree(((Y?))) but also what it has accomplished or will accomplish?

So what did you prove?

A riddle and a follow-up from Star?

So I said.

Repeat Calvary or Golgotha?

One-ex: If think that quoting the Bible makes a good person, mistaken.

Q: “But the Lord is faithful, and he will strengthen you and protect you from the evil one." - 2 Thessalonians 3:3

^Does it have anything to do with listening to and trying to understand God's teachings?

Q: "God is our refuge and strength, an ever-present help in trouble." - Psalm 46:1

^Do ((())) ask for God's help in self-interested(harm action) concerns?

^Will God give us the power of evil?

^Is there a god force at work? Or at what point is the devil's power at work?

Q: “And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one." - Matthew 6:13

^Watch over so that can have a strong heart to overcome temptation.

>>435

Differentiating between the Son of God and the Son of Man?

What is it based on?

Further thoughts.

How did dogma and symbolism affect world?

Blindness?

Let's say again, how many Jesus's and Buddha's etc. have appeared since this movement began?

And how many people were hurt because of it?

Has anyone been hurt?

If even one person, does it matter?

And if something similar happens in the 8kun, or if join this movement, wouldn't it be good for this people to confront these problems and try to improve them?

However, in this case, it may even be a personal attack.

Isn't that why Q+anonymous style/form is important?

And isn't it important to derive the best from the various ideas that arise from this movement?

And even though joined this movement, which is the opposite, doesn't the endorsement of dogma and symbolism and using this movement and making it into a cult, undermine this movement?

And if make a move that leads to religion vs. religion, wouldn't that also undermine the movement?

Also, doesn't evading accountability and hiding details create a situation similar to that of Fake news and propaganda?

Because it is a movement that brings together people of various ideologies and religions, I think it is responsible for its words and actions.

What is true peace?

What is true freedom?

Is it personal?

Or is it world?

>>437

This is not a denial of religion.

I am talking about the problem of using religion.

In other words, it's about using a great idea for a evil/harm.

Does the occurrence of these opinions prove that they are not dogma/symbolism?

Can silence ever be consent or concurrence?

Why do care about the numbers on the clock?

What happens when draw(get) a hated or tainted number?

If that one number makes good, it can also make the devil.

Do the numbers change the content of the letters?

Do change the way perceive the content?

[Symbolism will be their downfall]

>>439

And this is about constructive and smooth conditions.

>>445

Do you panic when you hear more chatter?

Is there silence due to panic?

Please tell me what you (((source))) by game over.

>>446

Anyone can just say the words.

Come on, let's see it.

Or do you demand that I kiss your feet?

I'm an enemy to you, aren't I?

Let's get over with!

I have things to do every day and I can't stop!

>>445 edit.

prevails > WINS.

And as I recall, didn't 'Q' say that ((('they'))) don't like to be questioned?

Does 'question' arise from critical thinking?

>>448 edit.

>And as I recall, didn't 'Q' say that (((they))) don't like to be questioned?

Has it been vindicated?

Have any of your wrongfully frozen accounts on outside platforms been reinstated?

Is this an unjust act?

If unjustified, have there been responses to them?

On the other hand, what does it mean that there is no lifting of the freeze?

Does it mean that it is better not to use outside platforms?

>>451

Is deleting an account the same thing as killing personal time?

>>451

Outside platform means outside platform can't handle sensitive items?

Outside platform mean outside platform can't see the sensitive truth?

>>451

Is the presentation of personal information an insurance policy in case of emergency?

To be physically silenced?

>>454

Isn't that something can do without bothering to provide personal information?

>>455

Does a name and a face give legitimacy to the words says?

>>456

This speaks to the system.

Does anonymity have anything to do with risk?

>>457

This also speaks to the world.

And tell them not only about dangerous situations, but also about when to communicate serious matters as soon as possible.

>>458

As an example, if are involved in a groupthink(cult/terrorist etc), wouldn't anonymity work safely in discussing questions have about the group(cult/terrorist etc)?

This is just an example.

I think this is also true when a familiar entity becomes a danger.

>>459

Also consider the process that develops to groupthink.

Also, the circumstances of groupthink, etc.

(ex: hidden chat rooms, etc.?)(A space only for a limited number of people?)

At what point do these become problems?

Are there any matters that are too late to be a problem?

Do the necessary and unnecessary reasons for transparency matter?

Therefore, does clear accountability matter?

>>451

Or should I just hit all the accounts that are acting strangely?

Or do I just expose the mistakes and debunk them?

Gathering useful information for things like the above to be perceived as offensive?

But what if one deliberately refuses to look at such information?

At what point is dissent considered an attack?

When dissent is unacceptable?

This speaks against intentional blindness to contradictions.

I also raise here the question of the legitimacy and usefulness of the current outside platform.

Are those numbers in the number-collecting game the real right numbers?

Certainly, following up by pushing numbers may be a time saver if busy with daily routine.

But if include number control, propaganda, brainwashing, feelings of the moment, and other people's perspectives, etc. are the numbers really legitimate?

Does it reflect the legitimacy of the brainwashing situation?

>>451

Is there any reason to encourage a platform that controlled the speech of citizens in the first place?

How far have improved?

>>452, >>463

Is encouraging an environment where personal time is easily killed effective in conveying useful information?

>>462

If a personal contradiction or problem is exposed or debunked, then trust is lost.

And once it is labeled as untrustworthy, it may not be seen even if it was a good idea.

What is important are the ideas that come from an individual's original point of view.

Is it more effective to erase their existence?

Or is it more effective to be improved?

Killing and silencing is very easy, but is this really the true solution?

Everyone makes mistakes.

Is there any chance that saying/action the wrong thing will reduce the chance that someone else will fail next time?

Isn't it possible to reduce the probability of the same mistakes by recognizing mistakes and truly improving upon them?

Q: 'Mistakes to you are rodemaps to others'

>>462 edit.

Or should just hit all the accounts that are acting strangely?

Or do just expose the mistakes and debunk them?

>>465

In other words, it is important to improve.

But not willing to make improvements.

What awaits us if do not even try to discuss and derive the best?

^This is talking about obvious harm.

It may be self-inflicted.

But what is the effect of that self-inflicted damage on those around them?

Is Q+Anonymity style/form not effective against these risks?

>>468 edit.

In other words, it is important to improve

^Wouldn't it be more effective to improve?

>>468, >>470 edit.

>What awaits if do not even try to discuss and derive the best?

^And talking about not learning from mistakes.

^Or About trying to be blind and intentional instead of improving.

Do these also include brainwashing or mind control damage?

If so, does raising the issue lead to a possible improvement?

>>451

Let's think further.

These talk about the harm that can occur with outside platforms, And these are talking about the possibility of personal time danger and the actual speech control that occurred.

I would like to know what else there is about these things of mine, other than the issue of personal numerical impact, even if I am wrong about what I am talking about.

What I am describing here is talking about improving personal safety.

Where is a constructive place to leave information quickly and reliably?

Where is a space/environment where can be sure to leave the information, and where can response it without fear of getting caught up in numbers or having our faces and names damaged?

(not just talking about fame when it comes to the damage to faces and names)

(And, imagine a digital tattoo)

Some may not fear these things, but others may fear the eyes of others.

Moreover, they may be taken seriously even if it is only a difference of personal opinion.

Furthermore, if a citizen without a bodyguard expresses an opposing view, is there a possibility of retaliation if that opposing view hits a particular point of view and destroys the individual's credibility?

And if the public is outraged?

As an extreme example, which is more likely to be dangerous, a brave person who reveals his address and face, or an anonymous person?

These also talking about the importance of anonymity and the implications arising from expand transparency and disclosure of sensitive information.

What does the expansion of transparency have to do with a situation where there is no excuse for not having heard or not knowing?

These speak about the importance of anonymity and freedom of speech and the possibility of protecting one's own/other's precious words and information.

Do think anonymity and transparency are related?

And, talking about the legitimacy and validity of participation in the 8kun/ch&Qmovement.

https://hatechan.co/

new trump board.

>>473 (not me)

For you, do you use it there to avoid the law, etc.?

Do different countries have different levels of personal risk and surveillance?

>>473 (not me)

Why did you post here?

You could have created a thread, couldn't you?

>>473 (not me)

What is your intention?

Can you please explain?

Please elaborate.

Don't you think >>>/QResearch/ would suffice without going to the trouble of moving it here?

>>460

Is it important to you to expand freedom of speech and ensure personal safety and anonymity?

Or do you want them to head for group chats and a more censored and speech-controlled environment?

Is securing your own numbers a priority?

Or is it more effective to increase numbers to a transparent environment?

>>478

Surely if can gather followers and money and free oneself up, might be able to focus more on posting?

>>476

Is it important to expand freedom of speech and ensure personal safety and anonymity?

>>476

Which environment is 'Q' most likely to post in now?

Do bother to check the trip code again on the outside platform?

Why not just use 8kun/ch to check the trip code?

>>>/projectdcomms/

Wouldn't getting people to 8kun/ch make it possible to check 'Q' posts directly?

^This I talk to about the constructive and certainty of information expansion.

>>479

Or do need to direct people to blog/group and for all to collect donations/followers?

^This is in reference to the personal donations, etc. of the participants of this MOVEMENT.

>>480

This is an 'word' arising from critical thinking.

What I want to know is the justification and validity.

P.S.

When I learned about 8kun, I already thought there was no space for me here.

I used an outside platform.

Thanks to this, I can hardly see my records anymore.

I tried a lot of things, and as a result I chose 8kun/ch.

Most of what I have left behind here is left behind.

I believe that is one fact.

Thank you 8kun/ch.

Patriots.

Anons.

Bakers.

BO/BVs.

Admin.

America&World.

Have ever considered the impact that statements and actions can have?

Aren't words and actions, humanity and common sense/ethical viewpoint important too?

Here, good luck and keep proving the validity and legitimacy of your statements.

Or are you just trying to make a point?

>>490

Slow and steady wins the race.

Something like that.

Either way, whether it's a test or not, it just proves it.

>>495

>>496

>>497

Can't escape from oneself, though.

How would answer justification and reasonableness when accountability arises for test actions?

^This is not me.

>>496

>>500

This is an 'word' arising from critical thinking.

Does (((they))) not like being asked questions because it reveals their own thoughts?

>>500 Further clarification.

>This is not me.

^ To the World.

>>502

Did 'Q' consider accountability important?

If so, what impact does evading accountability have?

This is my opinion.

>>503

When it comes to accountability, does Q+anonymous style/form work/functions effectively?

There may indeed be some unnecessary accountability.

But doesn't accountability also fall on those who demand unnecessary accountability?

Wouldn't many things then become even clearer?

Hence, wouldn't it be constructive/effective to have a reason or clarification？(Validity/justification)

^Wouldn't this also have an effect on the speed of recognition and understanding?

Q: 'Everything has meaning?'

>>504

Even with detailed explanations and clear proof, further questions will arise.

Ex: 'So what'?

>>491

>Slow and steady wins the race.

^It is when are in a hurry that take a detour.

<The more urgent the situation, the better it is to take the safe and sure path rather than the dangerous shortcut.

<Rushing into anything increases the risk, so it is important to remain calm and take steady steps.

>>506

But at what point is it decided that it is a detour?

Does a method exist to derive the best?

Or just a definition?

Constructive/Effective = quick/fast?

Taking things seriously is fun.

Learning may make it less likely that the same mistakes will be repeated.

But, Sometimes it is difficult not to repeat the same thing.

>>509, >>510

Why do need the trust of others?

Approval from others?

Trust creates validity and legitimacy?

or Does proof of validity and legitimacy lead to trust?

Is 'Q' unreliable without POTUS?

Would it be a not 'Q' if POTUS is not involved?

If actions alone are unclear, wouldn't language or something else bring us closer to clarity?

>>519

Certainly it can be difficult at times to clarify things in words.

Still, don't you think it is possible to reach a best through dialogue?

>>520

Would that also be some sort of proof?

>>520, >>521

Example.

As an example, let's say you have a complaint against the government.

Is it really legitimate to hold a rally to air your grievances?

(Is there any danger?)

Is rioting effective when dialogue is not possible?

(This is not intended as a recommendation)

Do you expect that by complaining and cursing over and over again, you will make a change?

Discussion is to derive problems and remedies?

What is the difference between disagreeing and just complaining?

Is rational discussion/reasoned argument constructive in deriving justification, validity, problems and remedies?

Are statements evidence/fact?

What is the moment when a statement becomes evidence/fact?

Is it a significant piece of evidence/fact depending on the degree of impact of the statement?

>>522

>Do you expect that by complaining and cursing over and over again, you will make a change?

Expand your thinking.

What is the difference between stepping up for dialogue and discussion and spamming?

The difference between what you want to talk about and what you don't want to talk about?

The difference between what you want to see and what you don't want to see?

Is the difference between when you can hear an opposing view and when you can't, the degree of compromise or acceptance?

^ Cognitive dissonance Occurrence problem?

Define: Cognitive dissonance.

>>477

And the next step is to connect catalogs to catalogs？

Create validity and legitimacy for XYZ?

I'm already looking at this.

If the theory that everything is not coincidental is all valid, then..,

All beings who have participated in this movement are to be commended, and can define what they say as true and legitimate?

Is this extreme?

What is the problem with DOGMA ideology?

Promoting blindness?

Or to make them stop thinking?

Could this lead to the creation of a new DS system?

Why do you want to build a DS system?

To create a new mind control?

Did they reveal any negative actions or explanations for these?

If appearances can be deceiving, does clarification, clarification, or proof matter?

If freedom of expression deprives others of their freedom or causes harm (inconvenience), is there freedom there?

Doesn't the act of giving priority only to personal freedom not apply to freedom?

Does deriving these issues and true good choices lead to true freedom?

or create an opportunity to articulate true freedom?

It is very easy to just claim freedom.

Remedial measures when dialogue does not take place?

Could post what you were trying to say at the time of the dialogue produce the same effect or impact?

>>621

Is there a relevant between DOGMA and transparency?

Blindness?

Is there a relevant between obscurity and transparency?

hidden?

That's a lot of noise.

It's not easy to make an effort to come up with a solution.

Appeal to technology if you can't use language and logic?

>>752 edit

>technology

Rely on false?

Q+anonymous Is style a way of pretending to be something you are not?

No, it is not.

>>754 edit.

Q+anonymous Is style there to fake?

>No.

>>755

>>754

Q+anonymous Is style there to fake?

No, it is not.

>>756

What is a name in the first place?

A list of words necessary for personal identification?

ID = Name?

If you have faith, you know that God is watching what you do.

How about a little perspective?

However, there are many cases where a change in perspective does not change the conclusion.