/qhaos/ - dARQhaos

>>1698

If you hear(response) something inconvenient today,

fishing is fun!

>>1738

This is a case I've seen with people who don't want clarity.

>>1740

In other words, it is used as a technique to prevent clarification.

>>1734

>'They do not want you asking questions'/Q1750

^Wouldn't using it to avoid a question be an example?

>>1741

>>1763

'Double meanings exist'

>>1759

>>1765

What?

You're saying this is democratic?

I think it's more of a meritocracy.

Don't you think that the best outcomes can be achieved here by relying on individual ability, that is, by leaving ideas that are truly beneficial to the world?

>>1766

And the question arises: at what point does what is chosen in a meritocracy become the right thing?

>>1767

What is its justification based on?

Has it been truly and clearly discussed?

Is propaganda the persistent promotion of a particular point of view?

Does propaganda include unclear labeling?

It's possible to label various 'isms', but at what point did those definitions become legitimate? And how were those definitions legitimately created?

>>1769

Let's focus more on the issue of propaganda.

Does it amount to simply pushing ideas?

Or is what's happening now just a case of pushing ideas that people believe are correct?

Would clear questions and responses be an improvement?

They can't have a dialogue.

Isn't this anonymous environment a great place for dialogue?

If you're just looking to get credit for your opinions, this platform isn't constructive.

I see this platform as a platform for revealing things or revealing the truth.

They can't have a dialogue.

Isn't this anonymous environment a great place for dialogue?

If you're just looking to get credit for your opinions, this platform isn't constructive.

I see this platform as a platform for revealing things or revealing the truth.

I think this catalog(8kun/ch platform) is particularly constructive for dialogue.

>>1770

However, if call information war simply a movement of people pushing their own thought,

There is no need to do such things; can simply wage war with force.

But isn't this movement happening because need to find the truth and what is right?

Doesn't is movement really give us an opportunity to clarify and improve the problem?

>>1766

> I think it's more of a meritocracy.

Is the ability to come up with ideas and leave a legacy that will make the world a better place currently being properly appreciated?

>>1772

What has the current system proven?

What has the decline in world population (or national population) to date proven?

>>1773

Of course, there are countries where the number has increased, but what has become clear, including those countries?

>>1773

If something harmful is happening in the present, can it be defined as a problem?

In that case, wouldn't it be necessary to clarify and redefine the problem?

If there is a narrow perspective, slow action, and a situation that does not improve, isn't it true that things that are opposite to these have been occurring up until now?

>>1776

That's why asking questions.

What have they proven?

>>1772

>Is the ability to come up with ideas and leave a legacy that will make the world a better place currently being properly appreciated?

>>1772

>Is the ability to come up with ideas and leave a legacy that will make the world a better place currently being properly appreciated?

^To what extent is it reflected correctly?

This may result in a response like this.

See, he's crying.

Did they present ideas that would make things even better?

Why does words exist?

>>1779

>Did they present ideas that would make things even better?

>>1777

>What have they proven?

Have they used clear words to suggest what is the best choice?

If they have already proved it, you will soon find the magnificent proven things.

If they say have already proved, where is it?

>>1780

>If they say have already proved, where is it?

Or how much of it is currently being practiced?

It's very easy to say.

>>1781

Did they just laugh at the challengers or response them seriously?

If stop taking things seriously just because they don't take us seriously, wouldn't that be exactly what they want?

>>1784

This talking about how if the right people are 'response(crystal-clear) to accountability', then what happens to those are evading accountability.

>>1790

>That's 'Q' taught the importance of proof

or 'Q' demonstrate a proof method using minimal IDEN?

Oops, is this the amount of time need to be careful?

>>1791

Does this work effectively with irrational beast?

What accomplishes is what matters

This is not simply a story about collecting numbers

If you're going to do it, then do it

Do you change your decisions based on whether or not you'll receive validation?

I'm just talking about the record

Do you just call because you know their names?

So what?

>>>/pnd/400600 Record

I don't know what you choose as your king or what you worship, but

is people's blindness related to the process and results that have led to the domination and destruction of this world up to this day?

I am a Christian, but I do not use the Bible as a tool to create a blind state of affairs, and I am against those who do so

Why do cults form?

Does it have anything to do with how they treat sacred texts like the Bible?

>>1838

Definitions and clarifications can shed light on certain darkness

The same is true for unclear movements, &/or words left over from the past can have a similar effect

In other words, this place is…

To be continued,,,

>>1838

>>1876

Now then, could a span of empty time also serve as proof?

You chose 'it'

>>1838

What is the purpose of that action and its underlying reasons?

Do you need to buy your book to continue posting?

You've already been given an environment where you can continue generating ideas

But despite that, are you holding back?

Or is that effort necessary to increase book sales?

Would your posting speed increase if you gathered followers who became your believers and worshipped you?

Have you worked backward from that?

The time it takes for your followers to satisfy you, and the time it takes for you to provide an idea

>>1883

And I'm not speaking only to you

The world, beyond dimensions

And I'm even confiding in God

Now, do you think Almighty God is unaware of the deception within you?

I'm not talking about mere entertainment that amazes and delights with magic tricks like turning water into wine

>>1702

Is someone else's death good advertising material?

What will we gain from revealing that?

So, you're saying we should track down those involved and catch the culprit?

Will that solve the fundamental problem?

Promoting dogma/blind/symbolism/unclear sources will only slow down and diminish this movement, and I don't think it will lead to a fundamental solution

You seem to be ignoring these things, refusing to engage in dialogue, and not aiming to clarify things

What's the matter?

So, is it impossible to end this meaningless war unless your follower count increases?

>I'm not talking about mere entertainment that amazes and delights with magic tricks like turning water into wine >>1884 (me)

>>1885

>we

or future

>>1885, >>1887

Define: Gametic

No response,,,,

It's like a mere corpse,,,,

Do you understand why the idea of ​​@tripcode came up?

The idea of ​​@catalog name has already been suggested

And if that's the case, /abcu/ would suffice instead of a catalog with a lot of blank space like yours

Regarding movements that try to exploit the Bible or this movement, and the many contradictions, real 'Q' has made past posts shedding light on these contradictions

Despite this, wouldn't maintaining a dogma/blind/unclear situation also be defined as opposing this movement?

Or, simply put, does it represent a situation where 'brainwashing' is necessary?

Does that mean they haven't won?

Of course, the conditions for victory may differ from person to person, but to some extent, isn't this movement opposed to the Deep State?

Of course, there will be undefined matters, but I think this movement aims to clarify even those things, don't you think?

PS

This poster also struggled with creating the catalog

This was because many patriots had already created unique catalogs

That's why I was able to create a structure that was somewhat different from others,,,(Ty, Patriots)

As you can see from the above, some of the catalogs are not specifically focused on 'Q', but this was done with the intention of providing an opportunity to learn about past 'Q' activities (such as Q&A)

Simply put, I hope that clarifying things will increase the options available and that those seeking healing will find true healing

It's very easy to be blindly by false comfort

Being blind is different from opening your heart

Nor does it mean blinding others

And, as one example, I think “purity” is involved in the state of “opening one’s heart”- couldn’t that very state be described as “Unbound words”?

Also, posting here (8kun/ch) is easy—you don’t even have to go through the trouble of registering a phone number or email address

/qresearch/ even has a welcome page set up

So what exactly are you referring to when you say “easy” or “difficult”?

Now, I’m sure you’re aware of incidents where people become so caught up in a so-called “game-like” mindset that they lose sight of the gravity of life, or where a longing for the afterlife leads to suicidal thoughts

In this way, perspectives on human survival and evolution vary widely

I oppose neglecting this world and our planet, or robbing humanity of its creativity, simply for the sake of dying comfortably

So, what have you proven?

That, too, has already sparked a reaction.

It’s true that “Q” uses the term “biblical,”

but it also uses terms like “true freedom” and “logical thinking.”

So, for example, what is “free thought”?

I'm simply reading the drops and embodying and proving the results of my logical reasoning based on them

>>1890

>difficult

^ difficult < very hard