Internet forums

[Samson79]

Are they now totally infiltrated with fake conversations (framed by groupthink dialogue) much like the screenwriter uses to portray a scenario.
Are the parameters being carefully meant to guide the uninitiated into inspiration via the desired trajectory of thoughts and arguements being presented as genuine opinions, or showing reasoning and discourse by screen names that could never truthfully ever be verified by the ununitiated mind, almost like in some unwitting arena that can be moderated by an initiated observer?

Im noticing far to many obvious dialogues on some of the internet forums I visit, grammatical signatures shared by more than one participant, also repetitions of ideas, never challenged, seemingly given a free pass and timestamps showing participants never actually having time to eat, sleep or live outside of the digital debate. Also showing low focus on proactive approaches, seeding of hopelessness and general apathy awarded to a generalized consensus based upon a specific viewpoint (sometimes manifesting as agreement for agreement sake trying not to look simply like towing a line and using fear and desire)

What safeguards or techniques can be relied upon now in the present term to ensure discussions are genuine and not simply being "faked"?

Anyone could set up a forum and hide behind a premise, calling it "the anti-fake forum, where people can discuss the perils of life without AI" so what can be achieved to ensure valuable time is not wasted online simply feeding AI with arguements it can use elsewhere? Can anything in a public online forum ever be relied upon to not become a observatory for the elite to stay ahead of public opinions being freely expressed for pretty much everyone to disect and create counter effects from genuine concerns, effectively using the public to plug their own freedoms?

[rachel]

I think you begin to get a feel of formulaic content. The best thing to do is not get too emotionally invested in the exchanges and note the narratives being pushed. Even if a site is a fake setup, there might be useful information to be extracted. I use and quote Wiki here a fair bit, I don't do that because I think the site stands on a pedestal of truth; more that it gives a clear narrative of what we are supposed to be believing. And sometimes in knowing what we are supposed to be believing we are given a massive clue to what we are actually being diverted from.

[napoleon]

What safeguards or techniques can be relied upon now in the present term to ensure discussions are genuine and not simply being "faked"?

that's a good question samson

personally i have made my beliefs and character one and the same(this was natural and inevitable)and makes it so i am the message and messenger.

this seemed to be a natural progression as i was dealing with certain fakeologists or truthers who had supposed restrictions on what they could say, wether they were masons,or swiss or vietnamese residents,all have topics they cannot address, i don't buy that by the way ,but liars will lie.

the only way to be fair, is to get honest men to address ideas in an honest website with an honest host ,2 out of three aint bad.

liber oz

[napoleon]

oh and expecting the controlled opposition to always have an answer or a way to divert a topic is wrong .Thats expecting the dickheads employed or recruited to be fully informed of the past 200 years of magic and onboard with the luciferian cults.

the shit i show would get hidden by the lowlevel controlled opposition ,hidden by them from their bosses,who also i might add are more disney employees with asthma

and as i said i am frankensteinsmjonster i am made of shit masons jews jesuits can't say ,like a kid that swears or rollo and his nigger usage .

there is no way to acquiesce what i am proposing ,ergo never ever be discussed .

[napoleon]

[napoleon]

at whatlevel of truth do we stop listening to people who have different opinions,is it because jay dyer thinks publicly jfk got shot ?
well if i quit listening then ,then i wouldn't have got the shining clues about constellations surrounding the boy danny,confirming my shining theory.

off the bat we got the judy wood followers ,this includes the same crypto posse abs rubbing shoulderrs with,david weiss jeranism etc etc

is it the so called truthers that come to fakeologist ,and accept 911 as something that is impossible to work out,thats an alarm bell in it's self.

is it throw simons work out because he thinks he's on a ball

how about .........the list is endlesss

you see where we are now ,i am no longer trying to communicate with ignorant people ,some of these giants i have stood on to see further,what else is there to do but solve one thing

and the best part is we have fakeologist.com to do it on
idon't expect the wolves in sheeps clothing to return to confirm anything of what i say ,as i don't think they are honest,more dupes than supes

[napoleon]

a way of ataining a better level of discussion

make a discussion room where the people who have a premise ,can post it for others to discuss,i did think that was what we are doing by the way .

rachels handsign thread is a must for discussion in this age of corporational awakenment,and what consent actually is.

the clever apes are all around and our rachel is one of em

[napoleon]

heres another one ,sep clues was pivotol in my awakening,and i thank simon for that and a million thanks for fakeologist championing the methodology of open discussion ,and that includes all the old fakeologists who discussed the pro's and cons in sep clues.

getting someones opinion is great ,not getting one is better

but there comes a time when all the pieces start coming together ,giving creedance to that now familliar saying spit out the bones ,we certainly have to with a plethora of these researchers, fetzer,andrew johnson,corbett,alex jones and theres more.

or to be more poetic all the bones i spit out from all truthers are the same shape and size ,indicating what ?

i am all for truth