Posted on 10/10/2018 11:22:24 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
There is life beyond q. And as much as q-pers may dislike non-q-believers, that does not make them trolls. Long-term FReepers are not trolls. If we can't coexist on one forum, then other arrangements can be made.
Advise you cool your jets.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3695531/posts
Here’s a link to the latest Q thread.
ransomnote starts a new one every so often. The header on the thread is a list of resources for general Q info.
Most threads attract a lot of troll comments in the first 100-200 posts, so don’t be surprised or put off by it.
The threads have been going on for long enough that we have our own inside jokes, acronyms, etc. Don’t be put off by that, either. Just ask. Posters on the Q threads are (mostly) very welcoming to non-trolls. But because of some bad trolling experiences there are a few who are on a hair trigger with suspected trolls.
We call ourselves FReeQs.
Posters on the Q threads argue about plenty of things but in a mostly congenial manner. Ongoing Q arguments/discussions:
1. Is Rosenstein a good guy or a bad guy.
2. Is Mueller a good guy or a bad guy.
Evolution of a FReeQ.
1. Disbelief. This can’t be real. You people are crazy.
2. Wow! This is terrible/interesting. How could I have not seen this?
2.a. I have so many questions!!! Help me!
3. Why is this taking so long? Why doesn’t Trump just arrest all these people now? I have my doubts about Q because he/they aren’t doing what I think they ought to be doing or on a timeline that makes sense to me.
3.a. Why are FReeQs so cliquish? Why is there so much non-Q chatter on the threads?
3.b. FReeQ threads are so delightful! I find owls 188% interesting!
4. Ok, I see that this is a complex process and it can’t happen overnight. I’m fully on board.
4.a. These people who show up and ask questions or doubt must be DS trolls. Or at the very least they are stupid and ignorant. I will sort them out and set them straight. I don’t have time for their nonsense. They are distracting those of us who have been “in the know” for a long time from our important work here. What a stupid question! That was discussed a mere 1000 posts back. These people need to stop bothering us with things that have been asked and answered already.
4.b. These people who show up are just learning. They are on our side. I need to answer their questions and provide encouragement.
4.c. I’m an “old-timer” on the Q threads now and I know what’s going on. I’ll make assertions without checking the facts because I am self-confident.
Want to learn more? Come on over. Read a bit, then post or ask questions. Feel free to PM me with questions.
Jim has given you a site for conservatives to apeak.
Yet you’ll throw him aside for one who makes you *feel* good.
“Give us Barrabas!”
Doxxing? Yikes!
I went to look to see if I’d been doxxed. Nope. Nothing there about my real name, address, phone number.
Honored to have made your list. Someday those of us who are on it will have bragging rights. Haha!
I remember that election too.
I was in 6th grade.
Kids were writing on the blackboards “LBJ for the USA”.
I would grab the eraser and erase the “f”.
Maybe we’ll get a yellow star displayed after our Freeper name, lol.
I think he makes himself ours by the work he does to publish his popular updates and by his occasional really, really good post.
Outside of that, we all have to own our own posts.
He can be banned just like me or anyone else.
If he truly has these emotional needs you speak of, he would be a good target to goad for some over the line push back, one might think. That could be useful, depending upon one’s agenda. (Pick a target, isolate, ban, divide...) Hmm...
But let’s cover a few more bases. He could be a rogue CIA agent with mad social engineering skillz, on a mission to carefully steer people away from the truth with slightly off Oracles, and lately stirring up FR trouble because it’s getting ready to get real. Hmm... Probably not, but stay vigilant!
Or he could just be another one of us.
He could even be special.
One of the problems with FR and I've been here for 20 years plus (even back in the CompuServe days).
Elections really folks obsessed and a lot get angry and attack if you don't blindly fall into the GOP mode.
Question Bush? You hate America. Don't care for McCain in 2008 because he was a dick? You want Obama to win. Aren't loving Romney/Ryan? You want more Obama and should die.
Now you can't find many Freepers that will admit to liking W Bush, loving McCain or worshiping at the feet of the great Romney conservative. Don't get me started on the Trump/Cruz thing or how much everyone loved Rubio.
Same as with Q, if you didn't follow the crowd you were trolled and attacked. Makes me wonder if "conservatives" aren't as bad a liberals some times.
This forum was intended as that, a forum. Discuss. Read before jerking the knee. Get the context for a change.
Jim is my hero since I found FR.
Then he let us have a Q space too!
He didn’t throw Quistians to the lions.
(To respond to your “Give us Barrabas!” exclamation.)
He is worthy of more than my small contributions.
You do know if you mention an individuals poster name you’re to ping them that you’re using their name. You have a long list there.
I wouldn’t want anyone here ‘listing’ where and when I post to threads even if it’s available otherwise on FR for the searching.
One theme from “the ‘Q’ Team” definitely applies to ‘all of us here on FR’:...”WWG1WGA” (”Where We Go One We Go All”)
No it doesn’t...that theme is exclusive to Q’ followers...it’s used here on FR as well as on line wherever you guys hang out or post. So please don’t wiggle it in that all Freepers are associated with your Q theme.
Yes!
You’re right.
It’s wrong to do that without pinging those people you’re listing them....just as when you post using anyones name.
There’s a huge difference between debating known political Representatives, and that of some anonymous/unknown group or individual floating around web sites trying to hijack and gather it’s own following playing political guessing games in order to engage posters on those sites. Which is what Q is.
Children, you say? Emotional needs, you say?
Everybody keeps going on about personal attacks and then you post that.
But I'm the bad guy?
What am I supposed to make of you, Mrsmith? That's twice on this thread alone that you've "personally attacked" me while claiming to hold the high moral ground.
Surely you (and others') are intellectualy honest enough to see the irony?
And this is exactly how it goes on the Q thread and non-Q threads when the subject of Q (or Sessions) comes up.
The personal insults fly and, if pushed back against, then the claims of victimhood from the instigators start. Then the mods are called. This latest trend is to cast the "Q-pers" as a group of monsters trying to be "divisive".
I wonder if you all reading this know all the vile names I personally have been called, not to mention the entire group of FReepers who dare to discuss Q or to "Trust Sessions" or "The Plan". And it has been like this since the beginning of the year.
Talking about "Q" or supporting Sessions, in and of itself, is a high felony and evidence of retardation to many here. But we're the bad guys and I'm a "child with emotional problems".
Really, Mrsmith. How would you react if somebody called you a child with emotional problems right to your face? Or called you a kook, or retarded, a loser, stupid, etc? That's what many who have posted on this thread call their fellow FReepers who commit the crime of Q-ing. All that and worse.
But we're the bad guys?
Just yesterday, ransomnote (and you will not find a kinder, gentler soul) made a new thread. A poster named Eddie01 immediately got on it and "cussed her out" personally, claiming that the "way" she structured the thread wasn't up to his standards. The curse words flew. Then he lashed out at other thread participants in the same manner.
Did his posts get pulled by the mods? Yes, as they should have. Did he get suspended, like I have on numerous occasions for far, far less? No. He didn't get suspended. p> But we're the bad guys? I'm the bad guy?
Anyway. I just ask you to see things from my perspective or that of the "Q-pers" (which in and of itself is insulting and condenscending).
If you are being honest and fair-minded, you (all) will change your reading of the situation.
And keep in mind a saying I like to use. "Don't start nothin', won't be nothin".
Anyway. I keep trying to talk to people. Maybe that's my real crime. I've always been hard-headed, and I truly believe that something good is going on here with President Trump and his alternative psyop/communication operation.
It's a whole new world, and a whole new kind of President. Why not Q?
I hope it doesn't bother anybody that I spoke up on this thread, but my name was mentioned so I think that gives me license. If there's a problem, let me know and I'll scurry back to my sanctuary city. But know that I'm just not a giver-upper. Maybe that's why I'm a "Q-per" in the first place.
#KeepHopeAlive
You stated ...”I wonder if you all reading this know all the vile names I personally have been called”...
But it is you that creates the environment for that. In part you can’t help that for it’s in your personality....but you do offend people and this not in a debatable way but a condescending manner... especially if they’re trying to reason with you. The game becomes one upping rather than discovering truth. But then Q is a game after all.
Mrsmith and I have butted heads in the past, which may explain some things about his posts.
Yes, I remember, Mrsmith.
Are you sure about that? I think a fair reading of every single conflict would tell a different tale, my friend.
Here's the problem. If I'm insulted, I tend to respond. But I don't respond in similar fashion. I respond in a better way. Go analyze every post I've ever made. The science is there.
I'll admit, I usually get the best of anybody that comes at me. And THAT is what pisses people off. Mrsmith still holds a grudge from when we tangled. And I remember you and I have scrapped a time or two as well, goodman.
But I challenge you to cite a SINGLE time I've started any conflict. EVER.
I do tend to finish them, though. That I will admit.
Divisive? Setting the environment?
I think not.
Smart people don't like to lose arguments and they anger easily. And there are a LOT of smart people on FR. You being one of them, caww. That I have to admit.
But smart people can be wrong too.
Some on Q treads truly ‘believe’ they are the special people who have the inside truth the rest are not privy to. It is very difficult persuading such ones to consider what they’re saying because they’ve put their ‘belief’ in that source and are fully convinced they’re on to something that only by others joining in will they understand......they can even get quite emotional if you don’t....even saddened because they want all to feel and know as they do.
You have leaders on Q and followers.....then you have those who peak and laugh, and those who on occasion chime in. Imo Q people don’t care who joins in as long as they’re willing to listen to their tales and stories....since the idea is to keep people engaged. Good or bad just keep the activity going.
So let's break your post down a bit without pointing fingers outward regarding ‘conflict’.
Your words.....”I usually get the best of anybody that comes at me”......”I do tend to finish them”
Sounds like you're on the defensive ready for combat and intend to ‘win’ the conflict including the cost of discovering truth. That isn't exactly debating now is it? After all you're after discovering truth are you not? Even in the face of insult?
How many hours, days and weeks was Kavenaugh questioned/ drilled 'without flinching'....as a good example of a man in control 'because' he knew he was right and confident in his positions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.