The 'Q' poll

[Bill Ryan]

This thread is simply a poll to sample Avalon members' views about Qanon, based on a suggestion by KiwiElf here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?107148-Qanon-and-the-Very-Bad-Day-Finally-Arrived-&p=1293630&viewfull=1#post1293630).


The poll options were drafted by myself (Bill) without any consultation with anyone else.
There's genuinely no intention to skew the poll by any implied inference or weighting.
Please note that there was a 100 character limit to each option. My first draft of each one was far longer and more detailed (and so probably much fairer to all parties). But I had no choice but to edit each one right down to the bare bones. However, I'm still pretty sure you can all identify the main differences.
I do believe the options cited, however crudely worded are representative (between them) of the collective views of the whole community.
What we don't know are the proportions, and so this may be interesting. This is the only reason for the poll. The mods are unanimous that no Q threads should be closed.
Please just choose one option, though some may feel that more than one may represent their personal views.

This is not intended to be another Q discussion thread. :) If there are any polemical posts of any opinion at all, they may be summarily deleted.

[Jad]

Bill my opinion is not reflected in your Poll. I think it’s a psyop and it’s run by the same people who started it.

[Bill Ryan]

Bill my opinion is not reflected in your Poll. I think it’s a psyop and it’s run by the same people who started it.

Okay, just check the 'psyop' option (#3). The rest of that wording continued with 'Maybe'. :)

Note: again, my apologies. It was impossible because of the character limit to craft each option to be as long and detailed as they all needed to be.

[waree]

I believe that Q is someone close to Trump and Q+ is probably Trump himself. There is too many proofs of Q's connection to Trump. However, I doubt Trump's intention. Is he good or bad? Right now I am pretty convince that his intention is not good for the regular people like us. I really hope I am wrong.

[Daozen]

Thanks for giving us the opportunity to settle this reasonably fairly.

[Clear Light]

http://avalonlibrary.net/paula/smilies/deer-popcorn.gif

[Ernie Nemeth]

Before I voted I could see how everyone voted. Now I've voted I can no longer see who voted how. Why?

[ThePythonicCow]

Before I voted I could see how everyone voted. Now I've voted I can no longer see who voted how. Why?

That's just how the forum software is coded, for all of us. It's not ideal, but it's also not a priority to improve this.

[Craig]

Whether or not Q is real, at least people are starting to think, isn't that a good thing? thoughts - words- action?

[gini]

Is it really that important who it is who,s finger is pointing?
Isnt that a distraction to what its pointing at?
What can be wrong about asking thoughtfull questions ?
What is lost by brains learning to think for themselves,and question what has been taken for granted?
The only thing what can be lost is illusion.. luckely whatever happens,truth cannot be destroyed :sun:

[Ba-ba-Ra]

I didn't chose to vote, as I don't see the point.

I have expressed many times on the Q thread that it doesn't matter to me who or what Q is. What's important to me is the amount of information that is being shared on that thread. IMO Q has woken many up, therefore has served and is serving its purpose. Q has pushed and encouraged many to investigate on their own. Yes, Q is pro-Trump, but I believe that most participating on that thread are wise enough to be objective. Do we "want" to believe. Of course, who doesn't want the swamp to be drained. To we actually believe? Perhaps, but with fingers tightly crossed.

Some of the vids on that thread I agree with, others I don't, some I just absorb the info to digest or send me on a quest to investigate on my own.

Personally I believe arguing/discussing who Q is can be a waste of time, since we really don't know. We (on that thread) did all question Q in the beginning, and then those who chose to stay felt that the information coming thru the Anons and others was worth continuing to participate. We were learning & sharing.. . .and bonding. Those 3 things alone are worth participating on that thread.

I have to admit, I was deeply disappointed in PA when I saw this thread. . . . and again I ask. What is the point.?!?!?! . ..We already have 2 opposing Q and Trump threads that are active where members can share their thoughts. I often read them as I want to stay open to the other side.

[gini]

Questioning is the way OUT of indocterination,its not new thing or a sign of being indocterinated.
Some prefer to ridicule and some love to inspire..

[Franny]

Personally I believe arguing/discussing who Q is can be a waste of time, since we really don't know. We (on that thread) did all question Q in the beginning, and then those who chose to stay felt that the information coming thru the Anons and others was worth continuing to participate. We were learning & sharing.. . .and bonding. Those 3 things alone are worth participating on that thread.

Quite true, we don't know who or what Q is. It's all speculation and theories based on personal biases and information input. But censorship is not to even be thought of, and it's good to have this record for history and review.

I don't have a solid view of who or what Q is but, even if Q is not closely associated with the Trump administration, they use it. There were 2 signs visible on the platform last year at a rally in Montana I believe. One said, "Where We Go One" and the other said, "We Go All". So even if it is not a WH/military psyop, which it could very well be, they are using it to their benefit.

[neutronstar]

I didn't chose to vote, as I don't see the point.

I have expressed many times on the Q thread that it doesn't matter to me who or what Q is. What's important to me is the amount of information that is being shared on that thread. IMO Q has woken many up, therefore has served and is serving its purpose. Q has pushed and encouraged many to investigate on their own. Yes, Q is pro-Trump, but I believe that most participating on that thread are wise enough to be objective. Do we "want" to believe. Of course, who doesn't want the swamp to be drained. To we actually believe? Perhaps, but with fingers tightly crossed.

Some of the vids on that thread I agree with, others I don't, some I just absorb the info to digest or send me on a quest to investigate on my own.

Personally I believe arguing/discussing who Q is can be a waste of time, since we really don't know. We (on that thread) did all question Q in the beginning, and then those who chose to stay felt that the information coming thru the Anons and others was worth continuing to participate. We were learning & sharing.. . .and bonding. Those 3 things alone are worth participating on that thread.

I have to admit, I was deeply disappointed in PA when I saw this thread. . . . and again I ask. What is the point.?!?!?! . ..We already have 2 opposing Q and Trump threads that are active where members can share their thoughts. I often read them as I want to stay open to the other side.

I agree with everything you said. I too am disappointed in this forum. The thought of people being shamed to drop a subject because some think it is stupid to even contemplate, well sounds a little narcissistic.

There are a lot of subjects on this forum I don't agree with. I don't troll those threads looking to ridicule people who do. I just don't open those threads. Is that so not hard to do?

[DeDukshyn]

Before I voted I could see how everyone voted. Now I've voted I can no longer see who voted how. Why?

That's just how the forum software is coded, for all of us. It's not ideal, but it's also not a priority to improve this.

What are you talking about? Just click on the number of votes (any option) and read the fine print. All the voters for each option are there.

[TomKat]

I chose not interest in Q because that's the closest to my opinion that it is a fraud.

[RunningDeer]

Before I voted I could see how everyone voted. Now I've voted I can no longer see who voted how. Why?

That's just how the forum software is coded, for all of us. It's not ideal, but it's also not a priority to improve this.


I didn’t vote, so this is what I see when I'm logged in.

https://i.imgur.com/v2qFAEc.jpg

Whether I'm logged in or out, I can view who voted by clicking on a number.

https://i.imgur.com/Ph3ICPf.jpg

[DeDukshyn]

I voted, here's how it looks and how to access the who voted how ... (logged in)


Click a number circled in red to see details... click to thumbnail see, not sure why it went weird.
40660


Details.
40659

[Bill Ryan]

I have to admit, I was deeply disappointed in PA when I saw this thread. . . . and again I ask. What is the point.?!?!?! . ..

The Honest-to-God answer is simply that I was genuinely personally curious.


That's all.
I didn't consult any of the other mods (or members) before doing this.
There's no agenda.
It wasn't to prove a point. (Any point.)
It wasn't to justify any action. (There won't be any. Why should there be?)
I had no prior idea what the voting would look like.
Most of the people who've voted, I had no idea what they would vote. That's been quite interesting.
I'd idly wondered for a while what the proportions of opinion were, and I was genuinely prompted to open a poll by KiwiElf's own suggestion here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?107148-Qanon-and-the-Very-Bad-Day-Finally-Arrived-&p=1293630&viewfull=1#post1293630) to do just that. (As I said in my post #1.)
Again! I was just curious.
Again! That's all.

We could always start another poll to find out if this first poll was appreciated or not. :)

But I'm also curious — what's so 'deeply disappointing' about a poll?

That's a genuine question. And there's no agenda in that, either.


I too am disappointed in this forum. The thought of people being shamed to drop a subject because some think it is stupid to even contemplate, well sounds a little narcissistic.

No-one's being shamed — unless for some reason that's somehow real in your own mind. That's NOT the purpose of the poll.

Please read this next sentence carefully! :)

I started the poll because I didn't know what the members' opinions were.

[Mitm]

There has been too many so called "q proofs" to ignore... it looks like the next thing they are trying to do is force the Deep state to impeach Trump, that way they have enough rope to hang themselves

[AriG]

This thread is simply a poll to sample Avalon members' views about Qanon, based on a suggestion by KiwiElf here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?107148-Qanon-and-the-Very-Bad-Day-Finally-Arrived-&p=1293630&viewfull=1#post1293630).


The poll options were drafted by myself (Bill) without any consultation with anyone else.
There's genuinely no intention to skew the poll by any implied inference or weighting.
Please note that there was a 100 character limit to each option. My first draft of each one was far longer and more detailed (and so probably much fairer to all parties). But I had no choice but to edit each one right down to the bare bones. However, I'm still pretty sure you can all identify the main differences.
I do believe the options cited, however crudely worded are representative (between them) of the collective views of the whole community.
What we don't know are the proportions, and so this may be interesting. This is the only reason for the poll. The mods are unanimous that no Q threads should be closed.
Please just choose one option, though some may feel that more than one may represent their personal views.

This is not intended to be another Q discussion thread. :) If there are any polemical posts of any opinion at all, they may be summarily deleted.

Bill,

Quite frankly? I do not think that you need to justify or explain your interest in understanding what the vibe is regarding “Q”. As the owner of this forum, IMO, you have every right to ask compelling questions. I myself wanted to do a poll about current ailments that might provide insights into who is experiencing what and where. Now I am cringing at the thought of being accused of having a hidden agenda. Why everyone is so “touchy” lately is confounding, but I would encourage you to not be daunted and “soldier on”. Your only detractors, IMO, are those who fear truth, as ugly as it might be.

[ThePythonicCow]

That's just how the forum software is coded, for all of us. It's not ideal, but it's also not a priority to improve this.
Ah - thanks to the various replies above, I learned something.

Before I vote on any particular poll, there is a button in the poll, just below the list of optional responses, labeled "View Poll Results". Clicking on that button shows me both how many other people have voted for each option and who those people are.

After I vote on any particular poll, that "View Poll Results" is no longer present. So I always figured that anyone who had already voted on a poll could no longer see who voted for what.

However what does show (if you've already voted) is a list of the options and how many voted for each. Moreover (which is what I just now learned), if you click on any of the numbers showing how many voted for any of the options, you will get a screen showing who voted for that, and all other, options.

For example, right now, six (6) people have chosen the "I follow Q. I believe Q is a legitimate inside source of reliable and important information." option. If I have already voted, I can view those poll results at the top of the first page of this thread, see that 6, and click on it, to see that the 6 voters, so far, for that option are enigma3, Lost N Found, Mitm, neutronstar, StandingWave, and Vangelo.

Thanks, Ernie, for kicking off today's lesson in my learning how this forum works.

[crosby]

I have to admit, I was deeply disappointed in PA when I saw this thread. . . . and again I ask. What is the point.?!?!?! . ..

The Honest-to-God answer is simply that I was genuinely personally curious.


That's all.
I didn't consult any of the other mods (or members) before doing this.
There's no agenda.
It wasn't to prove a point. (Any point.)
It wasn't to justify any action. (There won't be any. Why should there be?)
I had no prior idea what the voting would look like.
Most of the people who've voted, I had no idea what they would vote. That's been quite interesting.
I'd idly wondered for a while what the proportions of opinion were, and I was genuinely prompted to open a poll by KiwiElf's own suggestion here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?107148-Qanon-and-the-Very-Bad-Day-Finally-Arrived-&p=1293630&viewfull=1#post1293630) to do just that. (As I said in my post #1.)
Again! I was just curious.
Again! That's all.

We could always start another poll to find out if this first poll was appreciated or not. :)

But I'm also curious — what's so 'deeply disappointing' about a poll?

That's a genuine question. And there's no agenda in that, either.


I too am disappointed in this forum. The thought of people being shamed to drop a subject because some think it is stupid to even contemplate, well sounds a little narcissistic.

No-one's being shamed — unless for some reason that's somehow real in your own mind. That's NOT the purpose of the poll.

Please read this next sentence carefully! :)

I started the poll because I didn't know what the members' opinions were.

Some people see polls as a divisive tactic. I do not feel that way and I totally went for the first option. When Harley first started this thread, I had no idea what the heck a Qanon was so I never even looked at the thread - - then one day I was curious and I looked. From that day forward I knew in my heart that it was the right choice for me to make. All of the posts and videos have helped me pull everything together, become a more refined researcher, and to understand in full totality of what has been right in front of our eyes forever!!!!!

I plan on staying with the thread and I plan on continuing to try to enlighten people and hopefully wake them up. Since the beginning of my awakening I have always been searching for better ways to verbalize what is in my mind - - Not only have I found those ideas, but I have also garnered more strength and resolve in getting others to just SEE.

Thanks for the poll Bill.

warmest,
crosby

[Chuck]

I made a donation to the Project Avalon Forum mainly because I've enjoyed the Q thread.

[Bill Ryan]

Thanks for the poll Bill.

warmest,
crosby
Thank you! :heart:

Again, here's my position. I do sincerely apologize if anything I did or wrote might have given anyone the wrong impression.


I've not voted on the poll myself, and don't intend to. I don't want to influence anyone through my rather unique position. Everyone here is more than able to make their own mature decisions about how valuable the material is to them.



Many of the other mods have voted. I didn't even know all their views myself. We rarely talk about 'Q' between us... only how best to administer things so that everyone can benefit. (If possible!)



The main Q thread is valuable, and definitely shouldn't be closed. I've never ever voiced that publicly or privately, or ever even had that thought. It's one of the very many facets of information about the world that this forum is proud to provide.



Regardless of the legitimacy of Q, I'm well aware that the thread is a fascinating crucible in which to discuss the machinations of US politics. One reason why I don't follow all that closely is that (like many other members) I'm not American, don't fully understand all the issues or personalities, and (like some) have a wider view of the world in which the US is only a part — although a big part. I have the view that some things that are happening in Europe are just as if not maybe even more important than political events in the US.



I'll say this yet again, if I may. I was merely curious what the statistics might be. I had no clue before I started the poll. That's why I started the poll.

[Praxis]

I would not have voted if I would have known that it was not an anonymous vote.

I am pretty sure most on the forum are aware of my position on Q. I voted only to show numbers against Q.

Why would you show people how others voted? EW. EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

[pyrangello]

Bill, been following you since way back in the project Camelot days and have been around since the inception of Avalon. Your a stand up gentlemen sir, you are who you say who you are and agendas are not in your aspirations as a human being, moderator, or leader of this site. I for one as I am sure many others are glad to have you at the helm of this ship of discovery of journey. :)

[mountain_jim]

This unavailable Poll option best describes my current views:

I suspect:


(some or most) of Q was real
is a platform for the agendas of intel agency factions that support Trump against the Dems for reasons of indeterminate long-term value
is also a psyop in that support
is worth paying attention to for Clinton/Bush cabal portion of the US Deep State machinations and intrigue
it's current value or reliability can not be determined due to lack of much recent activity
was somewhat important in spreading to a wider audience some aspects of the long-term battle between the globalist vs nationalist point of view
it's value and validity in areas other than conspiracy truth spreading will be greatly lessoned if deserving US deep-staters are not tried and convicted for now obvious crimes.


For an early look at the (likely) military intelligence operators behind the Q operation, see John Solomon's story concerning a visit he received after appearing on Hannity in 2017. (John and Sarah Carter are the 2 reporters who often release articles that Q has quickly linked to in order spread SpyGate FISA details and such, and Hannity spreads the message on his show on Fox)

https://www.thepostemail.com/2019/03/03/solomon-reports-visit-from-federal-agents-after-reporting-on-fisa-abuses/



The podcast is a revealing and in-depth exposé of the work Solomon has conducted into the FBI and Justice Department’s use of FISA warrants on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page and other alleged politically-motivated abuses regularly reported by “Hannity.” The discussion about the federal agents begins at the 44:00 mark.
Solomon told the co-hosts that on that night in March 2017, he had spoken on “Hannity” about “a whole bunch of FISA abuses” and the fact that in the waning days of the Obama regime, certain of its officials informed the FISA court of what the court termed in an opinion the following April “Significant non-compliance with the NSA’s minimization procedures involving queries of data acquired under Section 702 using U.S. person identifiers.”
When he arrived home that evening, Solomon said, there was a “blue sedan sitting there with government plates” outside his home, from which two individuals emerged, asking him if he were “John Solomon.”
“Please just hear us out for two minutes,” Solomon recalled they said after he confirmed his identity. They did not say from what agency they were dispatched, Solomon recalled, and described them as resembling “G-Men” or “military.” He said the agents told him they believed he was “at the precipice of a much larger scandal.”
“We can’t tell you much,” Solomon said the men told him of that “much larger” issue. “The United States intelligence community, for a very short period of time, was used as a political-opposition research agency, and that is wrong. That’s not what we’re given these powers for…” Solomon said were their words, advising him to continue to “peel this onion back.” He added that they expressed concern that “the tools” made available to the U.S. intelligence community to identify “real terrorists and real spies” could be revoked if “the court finds out how they were misused.”
At the time, Solomon was collaborating at Circa News with Sara A. Carter, who is now working independently and as a Fox News contributor. After the encounter, which Solomon said was not unpleasant, he “wrote everything down” and sent the notes to Carter.
As of June 28, 2017, Solomon was Chief Operating Officer at Circa, which is owned by Sinclair Broadcast Group. Less than two weeks later, he made the move to The Hill.
When Lewandowski asked if “government officials” normally contact him after he issues a report, he said, “Never,” although he said he receives “lots of calls all the time.”

[Ba-ba-Ra]

I have to admit, I was deeply disappointed in PA when I saw this thread. . . . and again I ask. What is the point.?!?!?! . ..

The Honest-to-God answer is simply that I was genuinely personally curious.




To clarify:

I was deeply disappointed because twice before (or was it 3 times?) you shut down the Q thread because you felt those of us participating were becoming addicted! You also have made it very clear about how you felt about Q on several occasions. Surely Bill you are aware of the number of valued members who left because of those actions.

Of course you have a right to your opinion. And actually, somehow I felt that your actions were as a kindly father who was helping his disillusioned children from walking into the trap of a psyops that eventually would disappoint them. I never felt there was any malicious intent on your part.

However, I do think you might want to see how it feels from the point of those of us who are committed to the Q Thread. We are not newbies, nor are we prone to venerate. We are not there to argue, but to learn and share.

Trust me, we get it and all the possibilities of what Q and the current Potus could be/might be.

Sent with love in the hopes of mutual understanding, Barbara

[Bill Ryan]

I have to admit, I was deeply disappointed in PA when I saw this thread. . . . and again I ask. What is the point.?!?!?! . ..
The Honest-to-God answer is simply that I was genuinely personally curious.

To clarify:

I was deeply disappointed because twice before (or was it 3 times?) you shut down the Q thread because you felt those of us participating were becoming addicted! You also have made it very clear about how you felt about Q on several occasions. Surely Bill you are aware of the number of valued members who left because of those actions.



I think (from memory) the main Q thread was temporarily closed for 24 hours twice — maybe once? other mods may remember — to allow a cooling down period after emotions became heated. We've done that from time to time on other threads, too.

NOT NOT NOT because of any 'addiction'. Though I did state once, over a year ago, that I felt there was an addiction element at play.



Yes, I'm allowed to state my opinions on Q. So are you. So is anyone! But as you may be aware, I almost never post on any of the Q threads, pro or con. I have no wish for my personal view, which may be right or wrong, to be an unintended influence on anyone else. I'm super-mindful of that. As I remarked above, I've not even voted on the poll for the exact same reason.



I'm NOT aware of 'the number of valued members who have left because of those actions'. Who are they?

And a different response, if I may: anyone who's not interested in any particular topic has way more than plenty else to choose to read, contribute to, and maybe learn from. There are 5 (five) Q threads, including this one — I think. That leaves 89,735 others.

[petra]

We could always start another poll to find out if this first poll was appreciated or not. :)


I laughed way too much!!!
I appreciate ALL polls, even the funny ones :)
Being able to make a poll is powerful stuff, I'm glad to see you are taking full advantage of it. I've not been brave enough to make any polls (ha ha)

[Dennis Leahy]

Keep in mind that KiwiElf is the only one who said anything about closing the Q thread. Bill didn't, the mods didn't, I sure didn't. So, no Q supporters should be disappointed by Bill wondering aloud what the pulse of the Avalon membership is on "QAnon."

Like mountain_jim, there was no poll option that clearly described my viewpoint.

The selection I chose was: "I believe Q started as a LARP, but is now a platform for the agendas of intel agencies."

I don't really know if it was started as a LARP, and that is likely not true - more likely, it was an intelligence operation from the beginning. It caught fire, so the intelligence agency switched out the personnel with the keyboard, took tighter control. But whether it was some trump-adoring white house staffer or a groomed team of intelligence operatives at the beginning doesn't matter. What matters is where is evolved, what "Q" actually is, and who Q identifies as the bad guys and the good guys.

I was paying very little attention to Q until Q clearly echoed decades of zionist propaganda, shouting "REGIME CHANGE IRAN." The Q enthusiasts were looking for proof that Q was real - but just not proof that Q is a real intelligence agency asset, spouting the same zionist agenda as the overt zionists.

The good guys, according to Q, include trump, guiliani, and bolton. (There are undoubtedly other psychopathic scumbuckets that Q has declared as good guys, but just picturing these 3 alone is like a comic book cover of super-villains.) The saudi arabian kings and princes fit neatly in the "good guy slot", along with the israeli zionist supermodel, netanyahu.

The bad guys, according to Q, include Palestinians, Syrians, Iranians, and Venezuelans (all victims of global zionism, by the way), the main anti-globalist activist in the world: Julian Assange, as well as specific democrat politicians that tried to delegitimize trump: clinton and obama, primarily, but naming a few others such as pelosi. Q and adherents like to see these political players as "globalists", but to exonerate trump and his cronies, you'd have to fortify your cognitive dissonance to pretend that they are not playing the same globalist game and critically, that they are not tied into the same amorphous blob of globalist corporatism as the rest of the globalists. The globalism of trump and his cronies is overt, but strategically deliberately mis-labeled as "anti-globalist." It's a word game. Like switching the name plaques on cages at the zoo, so the rattlesnakes are now labeled as turtles.

Q legitimizes some of the worst militarist/imperialist/zionist sociopaths on planet Earth as "good guys." Everything makes a lot of sense once you recognize that ALL the faces in the US government belong to one large, infighting, Mafia-style "Family." Q is (or has become) a very real intelligence asset and global zionist propagandist for one of the infighting clusters among the Family.

Bill, you just can't compress that into 100 characters.

[onawah]

I really question that, Ba-ba-Ra.
There has been a distinct note of fanaticism and cultish behavior among some of the Q fans on Avalon, and some very aggressive attacks from them on those who have disagreed.
And lots of either/or attitude expressed, leaving little room for anyone who doesn't take a political side and doesn't presume to know everything about what is going on behind the scenes, but is simply exercising reasonable skepticism
(Though not so much lately, and I think the reason for that is largely due to steps Bill and the Mods have taken, for which I thank them.)
There has never been much support (if any) for HRC on Avalon, but I for one have been painted here over and over again as left-leaning simply because I bring to light things that Trump has done which do not match up to the glowing picture that Q paints of him.
That is how tyrants gain power, when people refuse to look at their hero straight on because they want so fervently to believe.
I am interested in knowing what is going on in US politics, but I would much prefer to get my news from unbiased sources, and not from manipulative psyop propaganda that pretends to be bordering on clairvoyance, no matter how many times it has been proven wrong.
In my opinion, the Q thread would fit better somewhere like the Channeled and other Controversial Material subforum.
At least in the thread where Corey Goode, Wilcock, etc. are being discussed, there's little chance that anyone would be deceived into thinking that the obvious disinfo is being taken seriously by those participating in the discussion.
Not so the Q thread; and though some of the info being presented by Q is simply news, the actual voice of Q is smug, manipulative and very calculated, and anyone who questions it is painted as either being stupid, delusional or a member of the opposition.
Very much in the manner of a staged, sleight of hand magician's performance designed to distract and fool.
Exactly the modus operandi of the elite, who claim they cannot be blamed for their nefarious deeds when humanity is so foolish as to fall for their tricks.
I don't mind the news that Q disseminates being discussed here in an objective manner, but posting all those Q messages themselves brings a dissonant frequency to the forum which I find quite offensive.
The medium is the message, and if it looks like a psyop :nerd:smells like a psyop :bad: sounds like a psyop :ear: :blabla: it's got to be a psyop :sad: and psyops are dangerous by their very nature because they are designed to create division :argue: and to subvert our ability to discern. :evil:
update: See:https://chemtrailswatch.com/guide-spot-shill-truth-suppression-tactics/ ...a subject worthy of much study!





Trust me, we get it and all the possibilities of what Q and the current Potus could be/might be.

[AutumnW]

That is so perfect, Dennis. Thank you.

[KiwiElf]

Keep in mind that KiwiElf is the only one who said anything about closing the Q thread.

Let's just put this in context, shall we?

Yes, I did ... in response to Daozen saying this:





(TO THE MODS
If common sense were to prevail, do we really need four "Opposing Q" threads? - cheers :idea:)?



If common sense were to prevail, we would not have any Q threads. :)


For the full context of the discussion, please start here - and please,... DO read right to the end of the thread:

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?107148-Qanon-and-the-Very-Bad-Day-Finally-Arrived-&p=1293477#post1293477

[Daozen]

Keep in mind that KiwiElf is the only one who said anything about closing the Q thread.

Let's just put this in context, shall we?

Yes, I did ... in response to Daozen saying this:





(TO THE MODS
If common sense were to prevail, do we really need four "Opposing Q" threads? - cheers :idea:)?



If common sense were to prevail, we would not have any Q threads. :)


For the full context of the discussion, please start here - and please,... DO read right to the end of the thread:

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?107148-Qanon-and-the-Very-Bad-Day-Finally-Arrived-&p=1293477#post1293477

Are you on guard duty this morning, Kiwi? I guess you've gotta do a double shift now DNA and Voice are in quarantine.

[Constance]

Thanks for all your thoughts here. They are greatly appreciated. :flower:

I voted that I am not interested in the Q phenomenon because as Dr. Norm Shealy once said, “You can’t treat a broken leg with a cup of herbal tea.”

The analogy to this is that our goverments are the equivalent of drinking a cup of herbal tea to treat the broken leg of humanity.

My perceptions are that governments are not and have never been the appropriate remedy for humanities plight. If governments had been the appropriate fix, we would all be living in a paradise, nirvana, a heaven on earth - or whatever you want to call it, right now. But this is not the current state of reality for most of us.

I am not sure if anyone will agree with me here but I think that things are getting worse and not better. Our broken leg - the list of what humanity is up against, is so long, vast and deep. We really do need to find the appropriate treatment rather than wasting our time and our efforts on the herbal tea.

Einstein once said, "We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them."

I would like to propose then that the remedy to humanities predicament lays outside of our current level of thinking.

Consider this for just one moment. What if we were to realise that what we are currently doing is not working and hasn't worked for a very long time, coupled with the realisation that we need to find another way of living and being with each other on this planet?

And then, what if we were to all agree to set aside all of our differences? Having done that, we then unanimously decided that we were all going to put our heads together in earnest to focus on an overall solution using what brilliant imaginations, intuitions, inspirations and resources we have?

Imagine all the brightest minds coming together from all over the globe representing every sector of community; the spiritual, health, relations, learning, arts, infrastructure, governance, justice, media, economics, science, along with every grassroot movement. Is there any possibility, any chance then that we could be an unstoppable force?

[RunningDeer]

Are you on guard duty this morning, Kiwi? I guess you've gotta do a double shift now DNA and Voice are in quarantine.

Junior high school flashbacks make me shiver.

Thanks for the reminder to dissolve all nonsense
that interferes with the cultivation of quality energetics.

https://i.imgur.com/3HeK42g.gif

[DeDukshyn]

Are you on guard duty this morning, Kiwi? I guess you've gotta do a double shift now DNA and Voice are in quarantine.

Junior high school flashbacks make me shiver.

Thanks for the reminder to dissolve all nonsense
that interferes with the cultivation of quality energetics.

https://i.imgur.com/3HeK42g.gif


... at the same time ... I did lol when I read that ... :)

[KiwiElf]

I would not have voted if I would have known that it was not an anonymous vote.

I am pretty sure most on the forum are aware of my position on Q. I voted only to show numbers against Q.

Why would you show people how others voted? EW. EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

Something to keep in mind with Opinion Polls, is they are just that - opinions - uninformed or otherwise. (No indication whatsoever of what formed those opinions).

It's well known in the marketing Industry that respondents often lie about their answers in Opinion Polls and tick the "perceived popular choice" (research the infamous "Have you smoked Marijuana?" Polls; sure they're going to answer "YES" (not))

Amazing how many members clicked the negative boxes on this one, and yet we see them lurking on the Q thread regularly. (... particularly from the "not interested" category).

And btw, THIS Q poll IS loaded, by approved research standards: ie

"I don't know how Q started. But focusing on Q is at best a distraction from important real issues" - at best, important and real are ALL subjective = loaded, that's an absolute "no, no!" (... and you rarely - if ever show their names* - that will automatically bias the results). :thumbsdown:

The way it should be worded is:

"I don't know how Q started. But focusing on Q is a distraction from other issues".

Just sayin' ... ;)

* This might be one of the few times I'll actually agree with you, Praxis! :thumbsup: ;)

[Daozen]

Junior high school flashbacks make me shiver. Thanks for the reminder to dissolve all nonsense


Hi, it's a pleasure. I deal with things my way. These people are trying to trick me, my family and my descendants into permanent cashless global government. This makes me slightly annoyed ... as the English might say. I have no issue with you but if you patronize me like I'm a small child, I'll just stop communicating with you. I have a million things to do. Even if you roll back and fire a charm script now #ohDaozenIdidn'tmeantocomeofflikethat. I have no interest in dealing with you. Please remember, I find you guyz high handed sanctimony and misplaced spiritual pride as irksome as you must find my cheeseball silliness. Blessed be!

Avalon is due a civilized, amicable-but-fair, good natured house cleaning. If you side with the guards on this one, Running Deer, it will manifest in a loss of trust from my end. For whatever my trust and time is worth to you.

[RunningDeer]

Avalon is due a civilized, amicable-but-fair, good natured house cleaning. If you side with the guards on this one, Running Deer, it will manifest in a loss of trust from my end. For whatever my trust and time is worth to you.

It’s never been about sides for me, Daozen. It’s about having an equal voice. I don’t understand why people can’t simply state their point of view and leave out the emotional garbage.

People grow through the exchange of ideas. If there’s a desire to hurt, it’s simply time to pay attention to what it's REALLY about.

Inner work is high on the daily to-do-list.

[Daozen]

I don’t understand why people can’t simply state their point of view and leave out the emotional garbage.


Cos it's fun, and a good way to diffuse tension. And don't you call my emotions garbage. Bye!

[RunningDeer]

Cos it's fun, and a good way to diffuse tension. And don't you call my emotions garbage. Bye!

There's no need to use others to diffuse tension. There are countless constructive ways.

Note: it's my last post on the matter. If you want to get juiced, you'll have to get your supply elsewhere.

:focus:

[Hym]

Quote from Daozen:

"These people are trying to trick me, my family and my descendants into permanent cashless global government. This makes me [I]slightly annoyed."

Aside from all else discussed here on this thread Daozen, I would like you to expand on your talking about what I see as an attack on your privacy and the privacy of all Swedish citizens with the imposition from the Swedish government making all financial transactions cashless. Is there another thread on the subject?

[mountain_jim]

Quote from Daozen:

"These people are trying to trick me, my family and my descendants into permanent cashless global government. This makes me [I]slightly annoyed."

Aside from all else discussed here on this thread Daozen, I would like you to expand on your talking about what I see as an attack on your privacy and the privacy of all Swedish citizens with the imposition from the Swedish government making all financial transactions cashless. Is there another thread on the subject?

a long running general (not Sweden-specific) thread on this subject is here:

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?86674-War-on-cash

[AutumnW]

If you look at the content carefully, you'll find that people who meet some of the cluster B criteria enjoy outrage as a hobby and way of controlling the opposition.

If they are wiley enough, they manage to work out their contempt and ego problems just shy of having the hammer come down on them. They do a LOT of damage to social settings because to them, it's not about a fair and equal exchange of ideas where one is able and willing to put themselves in another shoes. It's about winning for them. Period.

If you approach the personality disordered in a civilized way with civilized expectations you'll be sorely disappointed, confused. Onlookers, unfamilar with the style of the poster will judge posts through a more singular lens unaware there is a history, a pattern to the style. The idea that there is moral equivalency in representing ALL points of view, regardless of how reprehensible the style and content deserves to be looked at.

Daozen appears to be civilized and his ideas aren't rooted in needing to win debates. What has happened here on this thread is precisely the outcome you can expect when someone who is highly narcissistic is allowed to persist in a community that prides itself on being fair and inclusive. You invite those who don't share those ideals onto the forum, other members feel almost unclean in their presence, they react to expel what they feel is rotten.

Granted, life is not all hearts and flowers and rainbows and the forum is going to reflect that but there needs to be a mechanism to expel those who can't change their minds based purely on ego. When dealing with truly narcissistic individuals or those with psychopathy it's best to go no contact. When you are dealing with passive aggressives it's best to call them on it.

It's a difficult task and I wouldn't want to be responsible for it myself but if it CAN be done, it should be. Avalon needs more participating members who aren't using the form to grind an axe and stroke their own egos.
Names needn't be mentioned here, it's going to be an ongoing problem.

[ThePythonicCow]

And don't you call my emotions garbage. Bye!
And don't you accuse other members of having "high handed sanctimony and misplaced spiritual pride".

On this forum, your right to your swing your emotions stops at the tips of other members noses.


-- Paul, Admin

[onawah]

Bumping your post once again, Autumn, and thanks. :bump:

If you look at the content carefully, you'll find that people who meet some of the cluster B criteria enjoy outrage as a hobby and way of controlling the opposition.

If they are wiley enough, they manage to work out their contempt and ego problems just shy of having the hammer come down on them. They do a LOT of damage to social settings because to them, it's not about a fair and equal exchange of ideas where one is able and willing to put themselves in another shoes. It's about winning for them. Period.

If you approach the personality disordered in a civilized way with civilized expectations you'll be sorely disappointed, confused. Onlookers, unfamilar with the style of the poster will judge posts through a more singular lens unaware there is a history, a pattern to the style. The idea that there is moral equivalency in representing ALL points of view, regardless of how reprehensible the style and content deserves to be looked at.

Daozen appears to be civilized and his ideas aren't rooted in needing to win debates. What has happened here on this thread is precisely the outcome you can expect when someone who is highly narcissistic is allowed to persist in a community that prides itself on being fair and inclusive. You invite those who don't share those ideals onto the forum, other members feel almost unclean in their presence, they react to expel what they feel is rotten.

Granted, life is not all hearts and flowers and rainbows and the forum is going to reflect that but there needs to be a mechanism to expel those who can't change their minds based purely on ego. When dealing with truly narcissistic individuals or those with psychopathy it's best to go no contact. When you are dealing with passive aggressives it's best to call them on it.

It's a difficult task and I wouldn't want to be responsible for it myself but if it CAN be done, it should be. Avalon needs more participating members who aren't using the form to grind an axe and stroke their own egos.
Names needn't be mentioned here, it's going to be an ongoing problem.

[BMJ]

Daozen appears to be civilized and his ideas aren't rooted in needing to win debates.

After making that quote in post# 47, you seem to have missed post#43 by Daozen.

Daozen post seems pretty nasty to me, and to such a nice person as RunningDeer.

See below.



I don’t understand why people can’t simply state their point of view and leave out the emotional garbage.


Cos it's fun, and a good way to diffuse tension. And don't you call my emotions garbage. Bye!

And a few general comments:

- If people do not like Q that's fine, and in that case "move on" and allow those people whom are interested in the topic to engage on the topic of Q.

- The Golden Rule is the principle of treating others as one's self would wish to be treated, some individuals may like to keep this in mind before making their replies or comments.

[Bubu]

"Don't take anything personal" is a good phrase to remember. people are different, say things differently, those who are foreign to a language are foreign to emotions that words carry when use in particular. and lastly but more important , we have control over ourselves but not of others.

[Fellow Aspirant]

I think that this poll was quite interesting and useful w.r.t. surveying the membership's intentions and beliefs. The over "enthusiasm" of certain Trump supporters, I think, created an overblown perception of importance of "Q". His (or her) believers had skewed the attention that the thread received, making it seem as if way more Avalon members were interested than, in truth, there were.

So good on ya, Mr. Ryan, for allowing the majority of us to see that the majority of us are non-plussed by the phenomenon known as Q. Our lingering doubts about its importance have been allayed, and we can get on with more important stuff, like TicTacs.

Brian

[BMJ]

I think that this poll was quite interesting and useful w.r.t. surveying the membership's intentions and beliefs. The over "enthusiasm" of certain Trump supporters, I think, created an overblown perception of importance of "Q". His (or her) believers had skewed the attention that the thread received, making it seem as if way more Avalon members were interested than, in truth, there were.

So good on ya, Mr. Ryan, for allowing the majority of us to see that the majority of us are non-plussed by the phenomenon known as Q. Our lingering doubts about its importance have been allayed, and we can get on with more important stuff, like TicTacs.

Brian

I would agree with you Fellow Aspirant, the whole main Q thread is blown out of proportion, this is probably because the Q thread is highlighted by the relatively high number of daily posts and hence these posts being reflected on the "Newest Posts" daily.

A general comment, if anyone has an opposing view there are four other threads to comment on, and allow those interested in Q to explore, learn and make mistakes.

[KiwiElf]

I think that this poll was quite interesting and useful w.r.t. surveying the membership's intentions and beliefs. The over "enthusiasm" of certain Trump supporters, I think, created an overblown perception of importance of "Q". His (or her) believers had skewed the attention that the thread received, making it seem as if way more Avalon members were interested than, in truth, there were.

So good on ya, Mr. Ryan, for allowing the majority of us to see that the majority of us are non-plussed by the phenomenon known as Q. Our lingering doubts about its importance have been allayed, and we can get on with more important stuff, like TicTacs.

Brian

I'm sorry to disappoint you, Fellow Aspirant.

As I Understand from various posts, your forté is English? One of mine is Marketing Research.

When you convert the raw data from a poll, it's common practice to then graph it; in this case, a variation of what as known as the Standard Deviation Curve, - very useful in predicting trends.

It is indeed useful in surveying the membership's "intentions and beliefs". (NOTE: The trend is in its growing phase).

The results so far, show an approximate 1:3 ratio (30.82 % at the time of writing), fitting well within the "Early Majority Phase" - (significantly better that what I would have guessed), considering that the "Q Operation" has only been around for 2.5 years; a relatively short period for an operation of this magnitude.

(The only thing that is "skewed", (as I've already mentioned) - by Approved Research Standards - is the way the Poll is worded, and showing the member's names). :)

(BTW, Q is a team; there is no "his or her", as stated by Q themselves). ;)

40708

A handful of members, (less than 10), primarily from the four "Q Dissenter's" threads, have frequently claimed that "numbers don't matter".

Really? :sherlock: This is a revenue-earning (donations) web site.

Think of it being like a bank account.

This time last year, Avalon had around 950 Active Members, down significantly from previous years (and that trend can be tracked back long before the Q thread).

Four months ago, those numbers were down to 840.

Now, they are hovering around 780.

Clearly, THAT is a Downward Trend.

So, for anyone who continues to (illogically) blame the Q thread for the declining numbers, DO be aware that the Q Thread has consistently held the highest number of views, (1500+ views per day on average - sure, there are repeat viewing numbers in there), for well over the last year and continues to do so.

This shows high interest, irrespective of the viewer's opinions on the topic, and renders the above argument that the "Q Thread is to blame" for declining active members as "null and void".

(Don't take my word for it; Paul just ran the exact stats a few days ago).

2695 distinct IP addresses. Many return over the course of the month.
Current stats: 492 pages, 9,820 replies, 808,506 views
More stats: For the current (almost complete) month of May, 2019, some 2695 distinct IP addresses have viewed this Qanon thread, 718 of which IP addresses are from 284 identifiable (logged in) forum members, and the remaining 1977 of which IP addresses are from various guests (both human and search engine bots).

"Do the math" :waving:

If this downward trend continues, the "bank account" will soon be dry.

Please DO think about that. :idea:

[Fellow Aspirant]

I think that this poll was quite interesting and useful w.r.t. surveying the membership's intentions and beliefs. The over "enthusiasm" of certain Trump supporters, I think, created an overblown perception of importance of "Q". His (or her) believers had skewed the attention that the thread received, making it seem as if way more Avalon members were interested than, in truth, there were.

So good on ya, Mr. Ryan, for allowing the majority of us to see that the majority of us are non-plussed by the phenomenon known as Q. Our lingering doubts about its importance have been allayed, and we can get on with more important stuff, like TicTacs.

Brian

I'm sorry to disappoint you, Fellow Aspirant.

As I Understand from various posts, your forté is English? One of mine is Marketing Research.

When you convert the raw data from a poll, it's common practice to then graph it; in this case, a variation of what as known as the Standard Deviation Curve, - very useful in predicting trends.

It is indeed useful in surveying the membership's "intentions and beliefs". (NOTE: The trend is in its growing phase).

The results so far, show an approximate 1:3 ratio (30.82 % at the time of writing), fitting well within the "Early Majority Phase" - (significantly better that what I would have guessed), considering that the "Q Operation" has only been around for 2.5 years; a relatively short period for an operation of this magnitude.

(The only thing that is "skewed", (as I've already mentioned) - by Approved Research Standards - is the way the Poll is worded, and showing the member's names). :)

(BTW, Q is a team; there is no "his or her", as stated by Q themselves). ;)

40708

A handful of members, (less than 10), primarily from the four "Q Dissenter's" threads, have frequently claimed that "numbers don't matter".

Really? :sherlock: This is a revenue-earning (donations) web site.

Think of it being like a bank account.

This time last year, Avalon had around 950 Active Members, down significantly from previous years (and that trend can be tracked back long before the Q thread).

Four months ago, those numbers were down to 840.

Now, they are hovering around 780.

Clearly, THAT is a Downward Trend.

So, for anyone who continues to (illogically) blame the Q thread for the declining numbers, DO be aware that the Q Thread has consistently held the highest number of views, (1500+ views per day on average - sure, there are repeat viewing numbers in there), for well over the last year and continues to do so.

This shows high interest, irrespective of the viewer's opinions on the topic, and renders the above argument that the "Q Thread is to blame" for declining active members as "null and void".

(Don't take my word for it; Paul just ran the exact stats a few days ago).

2695 distinct IP addresses. Many return over the course of the month.
Current stats: 492 pages, 9,820 replies, 808,506 views
More stats: For the current (almost complete) month of May, 2019, some 2695 distinct IP addresses have viewed this Qanon thread, 718 of which IP addresses are from 284 identifiable (logged in) forum members, and the remaining 1977 of which IP addresses are from various guests (both human and search engine bots).

"Do the math" :waving:

If this downward trend continues, the "bank account" will soon be dry.

Please DO think about that. :idea:

Well, good on you, too, KiwiElf, for trying to clarify some things that you find are issues with Mr. Ryan's thread. I'm sure that marketing research expertise serves you well in your coming to grips with reality.

As for disappointing me, no need to apologize, as there is nothing in your post that connects with what I said my post.

Regards,

Brian

[A Voice from the Mountains]

This time last year, Avalon had around 950 Active Members, down significantly from previous years (and that trend can be tracked back long before the Q thread).

Four months ago, those numbers were down to 840.

Now, they are hovering around 780.

Clearly, THAT is a Downward Trend.

So, for anyone who continues to (illogically) blame the Q thread for the declining numbers, DO be aware that the Q Thread has consistently held the highest number of views, (1500+ views per day on average - sure, there are repeat viewing numbers in there), for well over the last year and continues to do so.

I think the numbers Paul gave a couple of months or so ago indicated about 300 unique visitors per day on the Q thread.

Active membership includes anyone who has logged into their account within the past few months, if I'm not mistaken. So we are talking about less than 800 active accounts on the whole forum over a span of months, versus 300 unique individuals who visit the Q thread daily, and apparently they visit an average of 5 times per day, if total daily views are about 1500.

All of those visitors are eating up bandwidth. Encouraging them to join and donate would pretty clearly be a boost to the community rather than an existential threat... as long as certain Avalon members are still mature enough to know how to respectfully debate or disagree with others without having a nuclear meltdown. The day will come when rational debate is fashionable again, and all of this noise is an aberration of a dying system anyway.

As it stands, I see no incentive for these people to join when they can probably also clearly see that they would be persecuted by the supposedly open-minded and tolerant mob here.

[TomKat]

Q Anon reminds me too much of Sorcha Faal to take it seriously. They both say they are spreading disinfo as well as real info, but I suspect it's all disinfo.

Or more likely, it's somebody with a tarot deck.

[Wind]

Or more likely, it's somebody with a tarot deck.

While Tarot cards actually are accurate.

[TomKat]

Or more likely, it's somebody with a tarot deck.

While Tarot cards actually are accurate.

Tarot cards can be accurate in a vague way. But don't constitute inside information.

[KiwiElf]

What a coincidence!

Funny that you mention Tarot Cards; remember this?

Take a closer look. (and the meanings) :)

40724