[caww]

.....” There are a number of details revealed by Q that have yet to be reported outside of the Q community”.....

Well that certainly would be what the q hierarchy would want you to believe especially if you're convinced he works in the Trump administration or/and close ties with someone who does.

[mbrfl]

You missed the main point of my post. The predictions aren’t proof that Q is legit, the proofs are proof. If you have the inclination look into them. It just takes a little research. It all depends on how much you want to find out.

[RitaOK]

So, you’re still over here contributing, what exactly, for our edification?

You don’t believe Q.
You find Q “codes” “unnecessary” — in classic school-marm speak.

You bailed out on the Q Socratic method of learning. Period.

You hasten to one-up Q drops with “other sources” that you don’t name and cite the “same information” as Q that you don’t describe.

You get a little tender push back and hours later it comes out...
You say, of we regulars, in a general fashion, “Some want to think they’re special....” (pp, barely).

So the problem is you don’t get Q and you’re a little green about the gills, of the fact that we Do.

Now Q is gone dark and “on the move”, and so we have a fraud vote against Trump’s re-election you observe our discussion relates to current events.
You show up with your foreign counsel to diminish who Q is, and who We are, for listening to Q+, and not appreciating your ignorance that is current events conversation is not a clarion call for turning us into one more chat and doom thread, but remains Q sensitive, as a way to recall four (4) years of Q drops and connect dots in current events.

If you can do that, great. Do begin.

If not, then you’re over here contributing, to what, exactly? ......

[bagster]

the q hierarchy

The what?

What are you babbling about, caww.

Explain this fictional 'q hierarchy' to me.