Did you make it your life's mission to call him a pimply-faced 14 year old and every other pejorative you could think up at the time, or did you leave him alone? If not, why not?
What's it to you if people are fascinated with this Q thing? It's not as if it's the first online guru who may or may not be what he claims to be, and he won't be the last.
If you're going to continue obsessively pounding away at this, the least you could do is coin a name for Q followers, you know, like "birthers" was so effective in sliming people who though Obama was ineligible for the Presidency. That was a good one, like Birchers, very sticky, very diminishing.
Come on now, rise to the occasion. Effective ridicule requires creativity, and creativity has been thus far lacking in your efforts.
There is such a name. It’s a very old legal term:
“In hisce massis eommode”
PS, why am I interested in debunking Q and his/her BS?
1, I don’t like liars.
2, It simply diverts FReepers away from a critically important task at a time when we are entering the worst constitutional crisis in American history since the Civil War, certainly worse than Watergate or Mrs. Wilson.
3, Publication of this “Q” Hyper-BS makes all FReepers and FR itself look bad by implication and association.
Any one of the three is sufficient.... and there are more.
At the time of Monicagate, FR was the one element tying all active government and non-government conservatives together for the latest news and plans of action. FR coordinated action prevented Dems from destroying 3600 critically needed military absentee ballots in Orange ans Seminole Counties during the 2000 Florida election recount. And since the final tally showed Bush wining by 577 ballots, without those 3600 votes, which were 82% in favor of Bush, hello President Gore.
That “power” and capability will soon be needed again, and Q and his/her effects makes that much harder.