The Qanon posts, and associated US political analysis

[Belle]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by The Crimson Horse Blanket (here)
Is this 'public image of Avalon' near the top of the concern list?

No it's not. My own prime concern is the strength of hostility and animosity that political partisan expression generates. Some of that has been expressed here, pretty violently, in the last 24 hours.

And of course, moving the threads to members-only doesn't address that. Providing a means to ignore personally chosen threads might have, but it's a moot point because we couldn't implement it.

But here's a question in return... for anyone to respond to.

Do you really think that Avalon is performing a valuable public service by making this material publicly visible? That seems to be the issue here. And it's a genuine question.

Again, the number of people who've written to us still stands at 3 (three).
(And, again, all three are welcomed as new members.)

fwiw...this thread is being used to share information between people who are already interested in the Q material rather than proselytizing to the 'masses'. By extension, having it in public view allows visitors who are already searching for information to find what they were looking for and move on...difficult to do these days with so much censorship on the web. In the end, when all of this is done, they will remember PA as a place of fairness and openness, completely separate from the googles and youtubes, etc.

Three new members are a good thing...but they are here for the Q material. I would venture to guess they would be unlikely to move around the rest of the site much...my speculation only.

There is a thread for an opposing view. I do wonder why it has gone quiet. They are offered the same opportunity as this one and yet do not take advantage of it. It could prove to be a draw for people who are interested in their material.

I see the main problem as being likened to 'oil and water don't mix'...unless the purpose is to 'stir the pot' and create problems.

One last comment, if I may. The terms 'partisan politics' and 'American politics' have been used over and over again to describe the Q material. I seriously doubt any of the posters on this thread would agree with that assessment. The movement is world wide, not just America centered, and directed to eliminating the globalists and their machinations. I don't see pedophilia, human trafficking, etc. as strictly America based, but rather a world wide problem.

[Bluegreen]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Bluegreen (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
We're not excluding anyone here.

Couldn't disagree more

But who's being excluded?

My (and I hope PA's) target demographic: Non-members

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by gini (here)
I think that Avalon is absolutely doing an important public service by making this -and many more threads-publicly visible! But i really dont think thats the only issue here,its seriously touching a painful spot of being again pushed in the corner,shadowbanned,hidden.
That unjust feeling like why we but not them? The feeling Avalon is choosing side..

Yes, I understand.

(Do note, as I reminded folks earlier, that the counter-Q-skeptical threads have also been moved to members-only.)

But — supposing Qanon is a psy-op or a continuing LARP? I'm not the only person in the alt media who's been around for a little while who has that strong view. I'd be joined by Richard Dolan, Joseph Farrell, Catherine Austin Fitts, Clif High, and Daniel Liszt. And, without digging around to count, I'm certain many, many more.

It's only people with a pro-Trump partisan view who take 'Q' seriously.

You see, we're not 'choosing' sides... it's exactly the opposite. We don't want Avalon to be misperceived to be having a political 'side'.

I was asked a while back (and I confess I can't actually find the post) to clarify what my own political position was. I'd posted last year that I was a Trump supporter. That was loosely stated.

What I really meant was that I'm delighted Trump was elected — and I still am — because it means Hillary wasn't in power to wreck the entire planet. She is evil incarnate, and I don't say that lightly.

But I'm no longer nearly as sure as I was a year ago that Trump was the hope that we've all been waiting for. There are just too many things he's failed to take action on. I'm afraid it's that simple.

(And Qanon has been quite wrong about a lot of things, quite often. There's strong evidence, in my view, that Qanon has changed ownership 4 or maybe 5 times in the last 21 months. But that's a separate topic.)

To return to Trump: if I were a US citizen in the coming election — I would not vote.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

The thing that really sticks with me is that there was no animosity on the Q thread at all, between any members researching it, at any stage - until hostility from the outside started invading the thread. It's very unfortunate Q has been barred from public view for that reason. It would be like censoring (restricting access) to a 'global cooling' research thread only by virtue of partisan outrage from global warming proponents.

Sorry to harp on, but on a forum that champions open discourse on any given subject, particularly conspiracy theories! one feels unjustly marginalized. This does not, I believe, serve the spirit of the forum agenda. It really is a sort of censorship. I apologise if that sounds pompous and self-serving, as Avalon's agenda is not written by my personal view of things. It's just that I don't think this is what our agenda should be.

Yes, the Q subject has been at the centre of quite a storm of late, and the desire to abate it however which way is a pressing matter to the mods, and to you Bill - I definite understand that. I just don't think this is the way at all. Not the impartial, most even-handed way.

What is fuelling this fire is, I'm sure, not the veracity of the Q material at all, but purely the passions of political bias, in that, Q somehow = Trump, even though Trump himself has never confirmed that Q is part of his administration, or even real. For the record, I was never a big Trump supporter, and do not identify with the Right. I'm a free-thinker in all things, including politics, and if I was situated anywhere on the political spectrum it would probably be somewhere near the 'classical liberal', an egalitarian idealist maybe, a 'spiritual utopianist' if there was such a thing. In researching Q I managed to peel aside those partisan outer coverings (which others cannot seem to do) and investigate the material for what it is, and what it is trying to show us. An effort to drain the geopolitical swamp (not just American!) from behind the scenes. Simply that. That's what Q research is. A benevolent pursuit of truth. Which is what Avalon IS at its core, too, at least to me. And it's why I think squirrelling the Q material away in a non-public subforum is a mistake, and an improper way to deal with this problem.

This whole mess has been quite heartbreaking. When Paul left, I felt part of the soul of Avalon ripped out. I do not know if it will ever get it back - certainly by taking this action it won't. I just do not understand the vitriol aimed at Q these past months - given that Q purports in its efforts to be a pursuit of truth and the light of hope! How and why would anyone want to oppose that pursuit? (unless they were an enemy of truth and the light?) But I'm not saying that... It's infinitely more likely these antagonists are seeing Q purely from that partisan perspective again, that Q must by definition mean Trump! They must cast those blinkers aside and wake the hell up, seriously! What it's about, deep down, is uncovering corruption and criminality, mind control and globalism, and social programming and paedophilia in high places, and on and on and on. To actually do this research, from the beginning, one does indeed uncover a great many things, that shows what's been going in this world for decades, centuries. To censor this effort is unfortunate, worrying and very upsetting.

What Q really is, what it all means, and where's it all going, I have no idea. On those issues I am, as I've said several times, on the fence. Gini said so too. I remain a dispassionate observer of those things I do not yet understand, but want to understand. Keep your hope, I say to myself, but keep my vigilance too. Watch, learn, understand, discern. That is the best way to investigate and understand a complex mystery. I did this with the Ruiner , right to the very end, and with Charles and Simon Parks and in multiple other instances. Q should be allowed the same platform and opportunity, in the same open, public space. To rise or fade, to stand or fall. By virtue of the evidence it presents. At the very very least, the jury is still out on Q. Whether truth or fiction, nothing's been proved one way or the other. Yet the verdict has somehow already been decided.

[enigma3]

Just a suggestion if I may. We get so attached to our personal paradigms that at times we cannot see the forest for the trees. Live life and live it as fully as you wish. But do not get so attached. That forms mental and emotional rigidity. It limits awareness in critical ways. It distorts reality and makes our rose colored glasses darker. Mental and emotional flexibility is one of the great spiritual lessons we can learn. It's not survival of the fittest, it is survival of the most adaptable. Tap into your mental curiosity like you did as a child. Go with the flow, chill out, and have another glass of whatever.
Someone bashes Q? I could care less. Posts are moved in an attempt to regain some equilibrium? Go to it. I'm just rolling with the tide and enjoying the ride.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
It's only people with a pro-Trump partisan view who take 'Q' seriously.

Not only, as I'm not one in particular. I am suspicious of various policies and stances from him and his administration. I just feel Q is something important, many of the 'Q-proofs' do still stack up in its favour, and for whatever that amounts to its worthy of open discourse and scrutiny - for good or ill. In shadow banning it, Avalon IS sort of taking sides, when it shouldn't be taking sides as you said.

[mgray]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by gini (here)
I think that Avalon is absolutely doing an important public service by making this -and many more threads-publicly visible! But i really dont think thats the only issue here,its seriously touching a painful spot of being again pushed in the corner,shadowbanned,hidden.
That unjust feeling like why we but not them? The feeling Avalon is choosing side..

Yes, I understand.

(Do note, as I reminded folks earlier, that the counter-Q-skeptical threads have also been moved to members-only.)

But — supposing Qanon is a psy-op or a continuing LARP? I'm not the only person in the alt media who's been around for a little while who has that strong view. I'd be joined by Richard Dolan, Joseph Farrell, Catherine Austin Fitts, Clif High, and Daniel Liszt. And, without digging around to count, I'm certain many, many more.

It's only people with a pro-Trump partisan view who take 'Q' seriously.

You see, we're not 'choosing' sides... it's exactly the opposite. We don't want Avalon to be misperceived to be having a political 'side'.

I was asked a while back (and I confess I can't actually find the post) to clarify what my own political position was. I'd posted last year that I was a Trump supporter. That was loosely stated.

What I really meant was that I'm delighted Trump was elected — and I still am — because it means Hillary wasn't in power to wreck the entire planet. She is evil incarnate, and I don't say that lightly.

But I'm no longer nearly as sure as I was a year ago that Trump was the hope that we've all been waiting for. There are just too many things he's failed to take action on. I'm afraid it's that simple.

(And Qanon has been quite wrong about a lot of things, quite often. There's strong evidence, in my view, that Qanon has changed ownership 4 or maybe 5 times in the last 21 months. But that's a separate topic.)

To return to Trump: if I were a US citizen in the coming election — I would not vote.

Bill, Ive been here before the PA/PC schism and I can recall you being on the wrong side of some theories.

But I can't recall any of those threads being banished from general view.

[ulli]

Posted by Star Mariner (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
It's only people with a pro-Trump partisan view who take 'Q' seriously.

Not only, as I'm not one in particular. I am suspicious of various policies and stances from him and his administration. I just feel Q is something important, many of the 'Q-proofs' do still stack up in its favour, and for whatever that amounts to its worthy of open discourse and scrutiny - for good or ill. In shadow banning it, Avalon IS sort of taking sides, when it shouldn't be taking sides as you said.

My stance is the same as yours.
To me, Trump is not really a Republican, even though he is a wealthy mogul, but he is someone the military white hats have picked to run on the Republican platform, so as to beat evil Hillary.

So to me the choice was more to do with whatever works, that can beat the evil that was using the MSM as their propaganda mouthpiece.
And pre-election Avalon was always a place where that danger had been defined quite clearly.

So people who call this a party political issue are not seeing clearly enough, although they are quite correct that both parties were controlled for decades. Not only in the US, but also in Europe.
Now with this huge realization, and masses of people refusing to vote at all, it has become a white hats versus black hats war.
A war designed to keep out the worst candidate.
The controllers know this and here in Costa Ricas recent elections they ( with the help of the controlled media, put up two unbelievable awful candidates, one an evangelical preacher, and the other a Soros puppet, who then predictably won the election.
Now, a year later, school kids are marching in the streets, fed up with having sexEd with the whole agenda behind it pushed at them. Morality is on the rise again, because of the heavy-handed anti family doctrines.
People have discovered here that the snatching of their children leads those kids into unbelievable dange zones of organ harvesting and sex slavery. And crooked judges letting those criminals off the hook.
How can anyone not want to vote for a politician who wants to be tough on crime, considering what is happening.

So even IF the Trump team is being manipulated by a hidden hand, it is still better to choose the option that offers justice, and a political slate that is protected against the possibility of corruption ever again getting out of hand.

But this military coup is in its secrecy and unusual tactics to me an attempt to avoid a bloody revolution, a world wide revolution, and protect the masses against the rise of a world government which would be run by some really dangerous entities.

[BMJ]

Posted by Star Mariner (here)
The thing that really sticks with me is that there was no animosity on the Q thread at all, between any members researching it, at any stage - until hostility from the outside started invading the thread. It's very unfortunate Q has been barred from public view for that reason. It would be like censoring (restricting access) to a 'global cooling' research thread only by virtue of partisan outrage from global warming proponents.

Sorry to harp on, but on a forum that champions open discourse on any given subject, particularly conspiracy theories! one feels unjustly marginalized. This does not, I believe, serve the spirit of the forum agenda. It really is a sort of censorship. I apologise if that sounds pompous and self-serving, as Avalon's agenda is not written by my personal view of things. It's just that I don't think this is what our agenda should be.

Yes, the Q subject has been at the centre of quite a storm of late, and the desire to abate it however which way is a pressing matter to the mods, and to you Bill - I definite understand that. I just don't think this is the way at all. Not the impartial, most even-handed way.

What is fuelling this fire is, I'm sure, not the veracity of the Q material at all, but purely the passions of political bias, in that, Q somehow = Trump, even though Trump himself has never confirmed that Q is part of his administration, or even real. For the record, I was never a big Trump supporter, and do not identify with the Right. I'm a free-thinker in all things, including politics, and if I was situated anywhere on the political spectrum it would probably be somewhere near the 'classical liberal', an egalitarian idealist maybe, a 'spiritual utopianist' if there was such a thing. In researching Q I managed to peel aside those partisan outer coverings (which others cannot seem to do) and investigate the material for what it is, and what it is trying to show us. An effort to drain the geopolitical swamp (not just American!) from behind the scenes. Simply that. That's what Q research is. A benevolent pursuit of truth. Which is what Avalon IS at its core, too, at least to me. And it's why I think squirrelling the Q material away in a non-public subforum is a mistake, and an improper way to deal with this problem.

This whole mess has been quite heartbreaking. When Paul left, I felt part of the soul of Avalon ripped out. I do not know if it will ever get it back - certainly by taking this action it won't. I just do not understand the vitriol aimed at Q these past months - given that Q purports in its efforts to be a pursuit of truth and the light of hope! How and why would anyone want to oppose that pursuit? (unless they were an enemy of truth and the light?) But I'm not saying that... It's infinitely more likely these antagonists are seeing Q purely from that partisan perspective again, that Q must by definition mean Trump! They must cast those blinkers aside and wake the hell up, seriously! What it's about, deep down, is uncovering corruption and criminality, mind control and globalism, and social programming and paedophilia in high places, and on and on and on. To actually do this research, from the beginning, one does indeed uncover a great many things, that shows what's been going in this world for decades, centuries. To censor this effort is unfortunate, worrying and very upsetting.

What Q really is, what it all means, and where's it all going, I have no idea. On those issues I am, as I've said several times, on the fence. Gini said so too. I remain a dispassionate observer of those things I do not yet understand, but want to understand. Keep your hope, I say to myself, but keep my vigilance too. Watch, learn, understand, discern. That is the best way to investigate and understand a complex mystery. I did this with the Ruiner , right to the very end, and with Charles and Simon Parks and in multiple other instances. Q should be allowed the same platform and opportunity, in the same open, public space. To rise or fade, to stand or fall. By virtue of the evidence it presents. At the very very least, the jury is still out on Q. Whether truth or fiction, nothing's been proved one way or the other. Yet the verdict has somehow already been decided.

I completely agree with your post 10429 and 10443.

And some other thoughts.

It seems alot people includes mods just don't get Q.

Even if Q is a psyop.

What does Q represents is the "biggest foot in the door into the minds of the global general public ever" putting forth all that we having been researching in the alternative media.

And so what do we do about this opportunity "squander it and hide it away in some corner."

Maybe we got three new members because they want to follow Q, but no more because the public can no longer see the topic.

And all because a few members make a whole lot of noise about disliking Trump and the Republican politics, without understanding that Q is not Trump nor the Republican politics it is about about self empowerment. It is a "movement" a "great awakening" as it has been touted so many times.

And these very members sit around wasting all their time picking their nose and thinking of ways to destroy the Q thread from being obnoxious towards Q supporters such as mgray, to linking it with racism, nazism or sexism or any other ism (Isn't AutumnW, maybe the mods will give you another hall pass and you'll keep getting away with your crap again here) .

Link re mgray "smart ass" comment by Praxis: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1301807

Link to AutumnW another "nail in the coffin for the Q thread" comment: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1301786

These members trashing Q do not realize that if they focused all that time and energy in posting on their topics of interests, that they might reinvigorate Project Avalon with new members and non-members.

And the irony of the politics being argued about that is linked to Trump and Q, is that Trump would have run either as a "Democrat" or "Republican" to ensure there was not another satanic individual at the helm of the USA.


With that thought, so where is their argument about politics then?


Maybe we Q contributors should follow the example of those members trashing the Q thread and go and spit the dummy and cry as loud as we can and then maybe we will be heard to. It worked when I was four years old it might work again.

[ulli]

BMJ, I totally agree with what you said here. And wish to add one more thought.

I listened to a Dark Journalist interview with Dr. Joseph Farrell, where they were bitching against the Q material like two teenage school girls, and I was shocked.
How can these two brilliant minds who I had admired for years been so misinformed? And then it hit me, just like Richard Dolan and other luminaries these people have become celebrities on their respective platforms, and have no clue what is really going on with the Q material. They are simply too busy to take the time and connect the various dots.

One has to be a bit of an autist, with a lot of free time on one’s hands to understand someone like SerialBrain2, for example.
Or one has to be religious, with a deep understanding of the teachings of Christ, to get Q. Like Praying Medic.
Or one has to be into spy thrillers, to get the intelligence that is presented.
Like the X22 report from Dave.

Those who claim it is a distraction might do well to see what distraction they themselves are falling for.

I would never judge anyone for not getting Q, or who is not interested.
But I do judge those who claim to know for sure what is behind it, and who ignore the fact there here is a movement that seriously address the evils in our society, be it Hollywood, the Vatican, the Federal Reserve, London financiers, or China’s world domination agenda.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

I don't like to take any 'partisan' view, for to be partisan in anything is to have tunnel vision and to walk in just one dimension. But it bears noting that all the blue names are now of the anti-Q, anti-Trump persuasion. This can be seen just by viewing the various opposition posts and the lists of 'Thanks' that follow those posts.

So I'm wondering how this is representative - how this is balanced - in the perspective we all wish to uphold, that Avalon is not taking sides?

This needs to be addressed and quickly, because if it isn't, Avalon will indeed tilt very much into a partisan way of thinking and operating, which is what we're trying to prevent.

[mountain_jim]

I also disagree strongly with Bill that:

It's only people with a pro-Trump partisan view who take 'Q' seriously.

due to the many who found value in an information/research stream not controlled by the MSM.

I did not vote for Trump, (later edit) had never voted Republican until an investigation-supporting US district Rep last fall got a vote), but intuitively understood that him beating Clinton was greatly important, not to mention worthy of increasing my popcorn supplies.

Q followed FBI Anon, who had already showed the value of leaking damaging information to awaken and inform folks of just how corrupt the US Deep State had become.

Q provided invaluable pointers on what and where to focus the anon-autist-researcher engine upon, which lead to growing awareness of just how deeply malignant our current global controllers situation has become.

Q did get too cheerleading for the last election cycle, and also has inflamed a certain flavor of patriotism, but before that, the dialogue pointing out and proving the complicity and lies in the MSM had great value I thought.

But the increasingly political cheerleader version of Q did not undo the value of what had already been accomplished, or the work ongoing in my view.

After that, and more recently, the anons and researchers did not need new-Q anymore to continue digging, connecting, and communicating.

The MSM-bypass had succeeded so far, in spite of ongoing efforts to shut down the chans and GAB through false flags, mischaracterization, and stopping hosting and payment processing companies from supporting them.

The recent spreading of details about the 'founders' and origins of Facebook and Google illustrate the importance of alternative, uncontrolled discussion locations of information.

As best as I can determine the Facebook/Lifelog relationship came from the Q-anons first, with the Q collective amplifying that signal now further amplified through certain other channels.

It's true that even here my views are not agreed with by some or even most in the Q thread, but the dismissive blanket collectively thrown over us by the sentiments that Bill summarized above being held by the Avalon leadership team is unfortunate, I feel.


(I miss Paul).

Just have to watch things play out and see where this all ultimately leads.

[Ba-ba-Ra]

I want to thank all of the posters who have articulated so brilliantly about the positive attributes of this thread and the reasons to keep it public. IMO it appears Bill and the Mods are tone deaf and will defend their decision at all cost.


So I say: ON WITH THE SHOW Let's keep learning and at least sharing with each other.


LATEST X22 REPORT
(Sorry, I don't have time to summarize - if someone else wants to, feel free)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=FrrIzk0gzQk

Financial Report - More on Gold and it will be the destroyer

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_MiVyeH3Y7Q

[Mike]

Posted by Star Mariner (here)
I don't like to take any 'partisan' view, for to be partisan in anything is to have tunnel vision and to walk in just one dimension. But it bears noting that all the blue names are now of the anti-Q, anti-Trump persuasion. This can be seen just by viewing the various opposition posts and the lists of 'Thanks' that follow those posts.

So I'm wondering how this is representative - how this is balanced - in the perspective we all wish to uphold, that Avalon is not taking sides?

This needs to be addressed and quickly, because if it isn't, Avalon will indeed tilt very much into a partisan way of thinking and operating, which is what we're trying to prevent.

I'm not anti-trump or anti-q at all. I don't give a sh!t about either of them, personally.

Bill isn't anti-trump. He just wrote in a recent post that he was pleased he was elected.

Many of the mods are apolitical, actually. They're not interested at all and find the whole thing pretty tiresome.

Once again: we're not anti-q, and we're not anti-trump. We're pro-Avalon. And what that mostly means in this situation is creating a healthy balance here. That's what we're attempting to do.

[mountain_jim]

Important in my view if you care whether the US FBI, Justice Department, and FISA process are going to held to account, and pierce the thick propaganda haze still surrounding these events.

It's not 'partisan' to want to clean up the results of the many years of Clinton/Bush/Obama(CIA) cabal families control over the government and non-elected position appointments.

Neon: The Mueller report should be rightly titled the "Crowdstrike Report."


https://www.realclearinvestigations....ng_claims.html

CrowdStrikeOut: Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims



"U.S. intelligence officials cannot make definitive conclusions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee computer servers because they did not analyze those servers themselves. Instead, they relied on the forensics of CrowdStrike, a private contractor for the DNC that was not a neutral party, much as “Russian dossier” compiler Christopher Steele, also a DNC contractor, was not a neutral party. This puts two Democrat-hired contractors squarely behind underlying allegations in the affair – a key circumstance that Mueller ignores.
"Further, the government allowed CrowdStrike and the Democratic Party's legal counsel to submit redacted records, meaning CrowdStrike and not the government decided what could be revealed or not regarding evidence of hacking."
...
"Asked for comment, Special Counsel spokesman Peter Carr declined to answer whether the Mueller team relied on CrowdStrike for its allegations against the GRU. Carr referred queries to the Justice Department's National Security Division, which declined to comment, and to the U.S. Western District of Pennsylvania, which did not respond.
"If CrowdStrike's role in the investigation raises a red flag, the potential exclusion of another entity raises an equally glaring one. According to former NSA Technical Director Bill Binney, the NSA is the only U.S. agency that could conclusively determine the source of the alleged DNC email hacks. "If this was really an internet hack, the NSA could easily tell us when the information was taken and the route it took after being removed from the [DNC] server," Binney says. But given Mueller's qualified language and his repeated use of "in or around" rather than outlining specific, down-to-the-second timestamps – which the NSA could provide -- Binney is skeptical that NSA intelligence was included in the GRU indictment and the report.
...
"While the extent of the FBI's reliance on CrowdStrike remains unclear, critical details are beginning to emerge via an unlikely source: the legal case of Roger Stone – the Trump adviser Mueller indicted for, among other things, allegedly lying to Congress about his failed efforts to learn about WikiLeaks' plans regarding Clinton’s emails.
"Lawyers for Stone discovered that CrowdStrike submitted three forensic reports to the FBI that were redacted and in draft form. When Stone asked to see CrowdStrike's un-redacted versions, prosecutors made the explosive admission that the U.S. government does not have them. "The government … does not possess the information the defendant seeks," prosecutor Jessie Liu wrote. This is because, Liu explained, CrowdStrike itself redacted the reports that it provided to the government..."

< much more at link >

[ulli]

Mike.
Good to know about your neutrality with regards to Q.
But what is happening is that you as mods have special priviledges and powers, that normal Avalonians don’t have.
And so, within Avalon, we have again an anti government rebellion.
Remembering that the best government is the one that is hardly being noticed, and that a heavy-handed government always becomes a thorn in the eyes of the people.

You as moderator, are able to watch my movements on the forum, even though I have chosen to browse the forum in “invisible” mode.
So any mod can see at all times where even those members like me show most interest.

So let’s say someone has wormed their way into the Avalon mod team, and who works for a data mining agency.

And even though I’m in invisible mode, they can zoom in on me and watch me. The mod team can watch all members.

Some members don’t know that this invisible setting even exists, and so as not to be traced by the mods, they sign out, and read along as “guests”.

And there are folks who don’t even wish to be seen as reading in the Q threads, as not to be mistaken for the more cultlike Q followers, but are reading only out of curiosity where this Q movement might lead.
They are perhaps more like the older member types...the investigative, curious Avalonians.

So making the Q threads invisible to non-members will now force these signed-out members to sign in, in order to read.

And that is in my view why there are many here who aren’t happy with the mods decision.
Not happy to be watched in their moves, as they know full well that not everyone who is an Avalon member, or moderator, for that matter, is 100% trustworthy.

Avalon recently discovered that a moderator was slandering another mod, in private conversations, to a third mod, and thank God, it was brought to light because the third mod had the courage to speak out about it, despite having been sworn to silence. And then there was an exodus of several mods, obviously all were loyal to this dubious person. And one of those was in charge of vetting new member applications.
See? I believe all of this needs to be given some consideration, and in the larger context.

[snoman]

Posted by Star Mariner (here)
I don't like to take any 'partisan' view, for to be partisan in anything is to have tunnel vision and to walk in just one dimension. But it bears noting that all the blue names are now of the anti-Q, anti-Trump persuasion. This can be seen just by viewing the various opposition posts and the lists of 'Thanks' that follow those posts.

Do you recall the nascence of the alternative media? You know, when the internet allowed us to explore the murky dealings of the amoral power-brokers? Places like Avalon began pretty much in that shared distrust of the PTB.. remember the days when they were referred to as the PTB?

The people in blue that you refer to.. the mods.. (yes you can say mods, smile) are BLUE because, well, I reckon they recognize the problem still exists. President Trump, or Clinton, or Winfrey... don't make no difference... they are the self-interested PTB.

So, you need to move on from the anti-Trump delusion and see that asking for a balance of political views among the BLUE team is faintly ridiculous. Why try to reorganize a forum that is intrinsically not political into a pro and anti pantomime?

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by Mike (here)
Once again: we're not anti-q, and we're not anti-trump. We're pro-Avalon. And what that mostly means in this situation is creating a healthy balance here. That's what we're attempting to do.

I 100% agree with the sentiment, just not the execution. Those who were interested in Q, posting and researching the material in peace, had no issue with anyone else, and caused no trouble. The hostility circling this wagon came only from those on the outside. Those who were incredulous with, didn't understand it, or were somehow offended by it. And there lies the fault, the dissent, and all this so-say perceived 'imbalance'.

By shadowbanning Q, and secreting it away in the member-only section, which is set aside for (not solely but predominantly) personal stories and personally sensitive information, you are disavowing it, yes taking sides, and penalizing the innocent. It should have been left where it was, for those who were interested in it, for members and non-members alike, in the public domain, open to scrutiny, analysis and discussion, along with the vast majority of all the other topics on this forum.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by snoman (here)
So, you need to move on from the anti-Trump delusion and see that asking for a balance of political views among the BLUE team is faintly ridiculous. Why try to reorganize a forum that is intrinsically not political into a pro and anti pantomime?

Wise words, but it isn't like that in practise is it. I never intrinsically asked for a politically balanced mod team, that is not just faintly, but deeply, ridiculous. This is not a politics forum, nor would I want it to become one, not in any sense. If you'd read any single word I've ever written, I make it clear I am not a pro-Tumper. I'm not even American. This is nothing to do with any partisan politics, as stated a hundred times. What is happening, and what is clear, is that since Paul removed himself, the greater majority of the mod by far team - and it is an excellent mod-team, and I have no bad word to say against any one of them - do seem to be if not anti-Q, not in the least bit interested in Q. Therefore, in taking this quite important decision to shadowban Q, it does not seem to me to have been a particularly impartial one.

[snoman]

i give up lol