I think you’re very intuitive.
Some of those blasted titles, at qanon.pub, have caused a lot of trouble. They can get a pass because they are linked so directly to and directly above the real Q drops, but certainly they have caused plenty of trouble everywhere.
Readers get confused, influenced by the title, and then hammered for confusing the words in the Q drop with the conclusions in the dang title above it, when.they.dont.match. Declarations in title should match the content.
You can peruse through, and as with all clickbait, you see a title that confirms your highest “hope”, but not actually “fact”, after all. Why? Because Q content does not actually confirm the title.
Instead, the damn title makes the attached Q drop sound ambiguous.
No outside comms ....
So WTH? Is the title now part of Q drops? Is the title a cover? Is the title outside comm? Why don’t the title and the real drop content support each other, in every case?
I actually wondered if Daily Caller or Breitbart were possibly writing some titles. They are both using clickbait, because it’s epidemic in journalism. It’s common everywhere.
If we're smart enough to understand that the titles at qmap.pub are NOT placed there by Q, but are interpretations and general titles of the Q drop itself (outside comms), they can be used as GUIDES and ASSISTANCE in our own interpreting. That's how I understand and use them.
It just takes understanding and ability. If other people can't do that, then oh well. Woe be unto the simple.
Bagster