This post focuses on group think or group(cultic case etc)action(Movement buster?)
In my country, there have been attempts to use this movement to form groups
(About the group, which was created in cooperation with foreigners and/or about: grouping/group think)
I'm not saying this is all a bad move,
It's true that there have been more opportunities to raise awareness of this movement, but on the other hand, think it has also created unnecessary division
Also need to consider that the situation and people's perceptions are changing every day
In fact, in my country, groups talking about Q engaged in a slanderous battle
I have actually seen people leave this movement(Things that are the result of group think action etc)
Of course, this movement is an information warfare, so if you are not fully prepared, you could be hurt, but I still think there was unnecessary division
Is this movement about grouping, gathering followers, and coordinating 'XYZ' and validity?
It may certainly be a normal confrontational movement, but does that mean are modeling ourselves after the same movements as our enemies?
They are deploying losing tactics, so will they be successful by emulating them?
etc, etc, etc,
……………………………………………………………………..
Well, could go into many examples, but
if we were to apply transparency as a solution to these problems, wouldn't it be effective to make the group think process and results transparent?
That is, for example, if everything that was discussed in the group were made public, wouldn't it also become clear whether the group was legitimate?
Or whether the group think was constructive/effective?
Can they clearly disclose those processes and results?
(Transparency(necessary topic etc) and accountability)
If it is correct and true, the group will be recognized and this will lead to the expansion of the movement
Wouldn't the problem be improved just by using such a highly transparent platform?
(And there will be no need to go to the trouble of clarifying the problem or insisting on transparency)
(Also, won't this prevent the group from going out of control?)(think: risk)
Does this seem like panic?
Does it seem like a complaint?
I simply observed the movement, pointed out the real issues within it, and embodied a movement for improvement
How can a war end without discussion/towards peace argument?
If discussion/towards peace argument or clear explain is not necessary, how can truth and justice be proven?
(If it weren't necessary, there would already be a much more devastating war)(think so)
If there are differences in perspectives due to brainwashing and the effects of individual view point, isn't a process of clarifying things necessary?
So what/who is unclear/opaque?
Also, why does this happen?
Does it involve problems with group think or personal attacks through grouping?
Also, are individual identification through group and targeting and attacks by groups a problem?
Also, is there a risk of physical violence between group members?
(Can you say for sure that there is no real harm?)
If you have everything, check it out
or These finer details are best left to those with greater technical access
Also, the group thinker have already exposed themselves
Does grouping come with responsibility?
Examples of actions that slow the growth of this movement include actions that discourage people from joining the movement?
Or is this a movement that only applies to a select few?
I also recommended joining /qresearch/ and 8kun/ch as a solution to these issues
They denied it
It appears that some people have expressed their intention to participate, but to me this does not seem like a move to truly follow 8kun/ch
(Well, if they're anti-8kun/ch, that might make sense)
(It might also be defined as a move/action of what they value)
This is because they appear to prioritize their preferred platforms and group think over this platform
Wouldn't improving these issues lead to the expansion further of this movement?
These are reports of my experiences and what I have learned
I am truly looking for constructive selects
Also, is the impact of grouping currently good or bad?
And are there other, better ways?
If group think is constructive/effective, does that mean that from now on everyone who joins this movement should form a group?
Will this lead to more unnecessary conflict, unclear and blindness?
Is it actually constructive/effective?
Also, when I asked questions about some things I didn't understand, I never got a clear response
Hence, This post is also intended to clarify these points
and Also, I posted here from a strategic perspective
(Is (group think) a strategic move?)
(What are the constructive, and effective to clear reasons?)
(Is grouping necessary to concentrate on research?)(Does it vary from person to person?)
(Also, it's possible to talk to anons here without creating a group, and if the conversation is in a transparent environment, wouldn't there be fewer problems than in a closed group chat? or Wouldn't that also eliminate the risk of group attacks etc?)
(my case: Or, when focus on research or creating words, group think inevitably becomes impossible)
Also, if there are people who think that it would be more constructive to do nothing, not think for themselves, and just spend their days aimlessly, rather than expressing such thoughts, I think a clear explanation of this would also make clear the best choice
P.S
Ty, Warroom
I've learned a lot from your catalog creation(topic) and your Practical ideas and movements in this digital space
