>>23488
>>23399
> Agree totally that extended vitriolic exchanges are not productive.

If WE do not counter these arguments, then who will? Certainly post bots that hit the tops of breads as we always had on 8/qresearch should be ignored. And we had our own shillistgic ratg fucks like Fungus and Tireseas (toilet boi) that spewed top bread space attacking that shit.
However, any shill deep in the bread, weather a concernfag, divider, a Freddy etc., needs to be exposed and attacked. Even in this bunker, and really especially now, how many Twatters, Facefags, Plebbitteres etc find this bunker, looking to US to guide them. These shills don't come here in isolation, they come here first to refine their toxic shit BEFORE hitting our allies elsewhere. We need to shut these fucks down!

> But brief exchanges can be EXTREMELY productive, if for no other reason that to say--to any third party listeners--that
> we do not endorse violence
> (etc)
And this of course. I do not wish to argue weather Q or 8/pol morons killed 8/chan, the point is they (8/pol) rejoiced in being comped. We did not, and must always immediately counter violence glowniggers. If shit gets to fighting, our mission has failed. But we are not there by a mile. Durham is now persuing a CRIMINAL probe! We are winning!
> Replying to shills is not a problem--replying to them bc you're triggered might be, tho. Anons just need to use our heads and be aware of what we are writing and why we are writing it.