It’s nice to hash things out, but let’s not try to force everyone into lock step agreement.
__________________________________
I don’t believe we try to force everyone into lock-step agreement. At the start of this thread there was a mix of answers to a visitor without problem. I’ve seen interesting, healthy debate on topics in your post.
Some equate rebuttal with attack. If we accept and encourage without rebuttal those who advocate views that run contrary to the core purpose of our thread, we lose our thread. “Open borders” and the equal embrace of fundamentally opposing ideology often causes loss of identity, in a country or a thread.
There are so many threads available to those who wish to advocate/recruit for the logic/opinion that Q is not real, is a larp etc., but this is the only thread where we can assert, support, and research Q’s strategy and purposes in relative peace.
That “relative peace” is hard won. We underwent months of intense trolling and demands our threads be deleted. We were over-run with those of opposing opinions to the point where the thread almost failed a few times because it was hard to locate research posts among all those insisting that we were stupid/crazy/gullible and that Q threads must not be tolerated on FR.
That’s the problem right there. The insistence that we embrace and cultivate arguments on this thread that Q is invalid/fake/a larp are followed (or accompanied by) demands that Q threads be prohibited and thread-overrun.
If I went out to the forum right now and posted on another thread that Q is real and drops are informative, my ideas are unlikely to be embraced, encouraged and cultivated as equally valid. I’ve seen many pro-Q threads on the forum posted by other FReepers locked because “There’s already a Q thread,” but I’ve not seen a limit on anti-Q threads.
You said, “I hope I will NOT browbeat them into going along with my view.” I don’t think browbeating people into going along with our views is the real problem. We’ve been ridiculed as crazy/stupid/gullible for so many months that we are (naturally) often in “defend-our-thread” mode because we remember those months when our thread was like the rest of the (anti) Q threads in the forum.
I recommend we give visitors (more) time to ask questions before deciding to mitigate anticipated thread disruption or anti-Q recruitment efforts by avoiding them or deeming them trolls. Disruptors and visitors may ask exactly the same questions or express the same doubts. Directing them to review provided links may be the most interesting, welcoming way to help noobs check out Q in relative comfort (high quality content). I think FAQ pages linked from the thread table can help. Some legitimate visitors today may be those whom used to troll our threads in the past. We don’t always know how to welcome visitors or discern guest from troll, we’ve made mistakes, but we are learning.
I posted this on that other thread:
That’s the point. We here on FR know how to think and investigate. Q is a method of teaching young people and those who are unaware how to think for themselves and investigate. Change can’t happen if two-thirds of the voters are uninformed sheep.
What Q is doing is what we’ve done on FR for years. Q just does it by posing questions and cryptic phrases to protect his identity from being discovered.
When has FR ever refused to investigate an issue? When has FR ever made a snap judgement on an event without looking at it closely? Why are some FReepers asking us to do that now? What is to be feared by discussing it?
Great stuff had to be repeated!!Hit way out of the park. "Freedom" should always be a part of FR.
Perfectly stated.