Not important to him. His goal is to keep us from staying up-to-speed. His method is posting his Deepie slides.
_________________________________
Are you referring to the latest “book report” at #382 meant to occupy/waste as much of our time as possible? Or one of our other shills?
I'ms still exactly who I say I am: a long time Freeper seeking the truth, and I'm willing to look at the evidence, and try to fairly evaluate it.
I am not a religious devotee of Q, that doesn't seem like a healthy attitude to me.
If this was a religious thread, I wouldn't present counter-evidence, because those are "Devotional Threads", they post at the top that they are for believers in that religion only (like Mormons on the Mormon thread).
Maybe you should petition Jim Rob to make your threads "Devotional" too, then you can ban people asking hard questions, or presenting divergent evidence, just like the hosts of the Mormon Devotional Caucus, Catholic Devotional Caucus, etc. can and do. Of course, you'd be admitting you are turning Q into a religion in doing that.
I don't think Q is a religion, it's just a very large psy-ops operation, so really the interesting thing is who's operation is it, and what is their motivation.
I think we've learned a whole lot about the origin of Q in the last few days, at least if you believe Microchip. There is a lot of evidence there, to be evaluated.
That might upset you, but it's still out there. I'm sure there are other people reading this thread who will enjoy getting the raw information and making their own decisions. (I do get some praise from others on the thread, as well as a number of PM's from people who don't want to post anything real on this thread because they see how rudley people not towing the entire Q-line are treated.)
Yesterday ransomnote asked me "please don't reply to my posts" but today you are calling me out (not by name, but by post number?)
Kind of a one way street. I am not to address you, while you are free to name-call me?
Is that how you really want to roll?
How about engaging with the evidence, for a change, instead of more ad hominem attacks and name-calling?
The “book report” is also sort of like a filibuster.
I was referring to another troll, but I see that that clown has shown up, as well.
Your #389:
Book report. Good one! Funny that I knew who the poster was after about three sentences in.