3 ms·

Then explain Q theory? My theory is it’s bitcoin whale trolls doing it for money, crypto, power, influence, and last but certainly not least, for the lulz. I a

Then explain Q theory? My theory is it’s bitcoin whale trolls doing it for money, crypto, power, influence, and last but certainly not least, for the lulz. I agree with you. I see you around HN. DM me sometime if you want to talk. Not about Q I hope; I am tired enough of politics as it is and can’t wait for the election to just happen and be over. I only mention it because I believe there’s a link between the downvoting parties and Q, though I can’t prove it in any specific instance. Will look for citation on research I read the other day showing that #alllivesmatter is almost entirely a reactionary movement in response to #blacklivesmatter original content, lending credence to the theory that it is a small group of people operating a lot of bots to down out #blacklivesmatter, which was supported with data and code from the Twitter API. If someone has this link drop it below.

fit2rule 6y ago
>Q I have zero interest in Q other than that it is yet another collective entity which is self-serving opinions to an in-group, who as individuals, collectively form a consensus - whether its 'correct' or not - and strive to either grow that group or attack anyone who would act to counter its narrative. This is an intrinsic feature of human discourse, whether its with the "everyone knows those guys are crazy" group, or "everyone knows what everyone knows" group .. The point is, collective agreement is not truth. Its just what the masses think is true - and this is highly specious, anyway. For example, it was once collectively 'true' that disease was spread by miasma, and anyone who suggested hand-washing was degraded into oblivion. This factor happens intrinsically in all human relations - and online social media is not immune to it, but rather acts as a force magnifier for collectively-derived reality. What is todays "hand washing decreases mortality rate" issue, is tomorrows "this is an amazing discovery we should have paid more attention to at the time, but didn't, because 'everyone knew' it was 'wrong'" ..
- aspenmayer 6y ago
  I can’t tell if you’re comparing Q to hand washing advocates, or to those anti-handwashing naysayers?
  - fit2rule 6y ago
    It is simply too soon to tell. ;)
    - aspenmayer 6y ago
      You’re an affable rogue, after my own heart lol
      - fit2rule 6y ago
        Thanks. After all the flagging and downvotes, that actually makes me smile.

fit2rule 6y ago

>Q I have zero interest in Q other than that it is yet another collective entity which is self-serving opinions to an in-group, who as individuals, collectively form a consensus - whether its 'correct' or not - and strive to either grow that group or attack anyone who would act to counter its narrative. This is an intrinsic feature of human discourse, whether its with the "everyone knows those guys are crazy" group, or "everyone knows what everyone knows" group .. The point is, collective agreement is not truth. Its just what the masses think is true - and this is highly specious, anyway. For example, it was once collectively 'true' that disease was spread by miasma, and anyone who suggested hand-washing was degraded into oblivion. This factor happens intrinsically in all human relations - and online social media is not immune to it, but rather acts as a force magnifier for collectively-derived reality. What is todays "hand washing decreases mortality rate" issue, is tomorrows "this is an amazing discovery we should have paid more attention to at the time, but didn't, because 'everyone knew' it was 'wrong'" ..

aspenmayer 6y ago
I can’t tell if you’re comparing Q to hand washing advocates, or to those anti-handwashing naysayers?
- fit2rule 6y ago
  It is simply too soon to tell. ;)
  - aspenmayer 6y ago
    You’re an affable rogue, after my own heart lol
    - fit2rule 6y ago
      Thanks. After all the flagging and downvotes, that actually makes me smile.