You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

boutfiddy ago

I respectfully disagree. He definitely has intel background and has time in the trenches disseminating volumes of information and composing briefs.

He just thinks extemporaneously and writes vigorously. I do not agree with much of what he thinks, but he comes from a genuine place and is just trying to assert his voice in this very important time in history.

SearchVoatBot ago

This comment was linked by @Trigglypuff from this comment.

Posted automatically (#1515) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.

SearchVoat ago

Bleep bloop, someone mentioned this comment!

'The Great @neonrevolt sperge-out' was posted in v/ProtectVoat by @kevdude and refers to this comment.

This notification (#557) was posted automatically by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. More information here, including how to suppress these notifications.

SearchVoat ago

Bleep bloop, someone mentioned this comment!

'After checking out this comment thread, I calculated that @Neon_Revolt has an insult to argument ratio of 4:1. That's pretty fucking weak !' was posted in v/whatever by @Rotteuxx and refers to this comment.

This notification (#554) was posted automatically by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. More information here, including how to suppress these notifications.

SearchVoat ago

Bleep bloop, someone mentioned this comment!

'ITT I call out another account that waited 2 years to make its first comment and @neonrevolt gets defensive' was posted in v/ProtectVoat by @kevdude and refers to this comment.

This notification (#466) was posted automatically by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot(https://voat.co/v/SearchVoat/2723025). More information here, including how to suppress this notification.

Blacksmith21 ago

I appreciate constructive criticism and functioning as a sounding board. This ^ is what we are supposed to do, not call each other niggerfagkikes.

Food for thought:

1) NR is a SHITTY writer. Stream of consciousness. Nothing academic. Nothing wrong with that, but don't confuse quantity over quality?

2) What makes you think he comes form a "genuine" place? Wasn't the same thought of AJ, Corsi, and others? Genuine?

3) Of course NR is trying to assert their voice. Isn't that what everyone is doing right now? Just because one is loud, doesn't mean they are right.

4) What makes you say "He definitely has intel background"?

julzee2 ago

Imo he is a clown. But it doesn't matter whether he is or whether he's coming from a "genuine" place. The end result is the same. He leads ppl AWAY from trusting Q and the plan, not towards trusting Q/plan. https://voat.co/v/QRV/2742263

Blacksmith21 ago

Crensch did a helluva job compiling all of the evidence. What amazes me is NR could've put the whole thing to rest by leaving v/GA alone, responding to questions I raised above, shown a little humility, and tossed in a little apology for a misunderstanding would have gone a long way.

But that is difficult for people who are high on themselves.

julzee2 ago

I peeked at it but didn't have time to reaaly go through his whole thing. Looks like NR was inserting himself as a wanna-be leader or something..? That's why I called him out in my video. "If" he truely were "genuine" he could have slso come out with a better response to this blowback he got from the first article. Maybe take an "honest" look at how his negativity hurts ppl's ability to discern wtf is going on ya know? But no, he took that entire 2nd article to do nothing but defend his negativity and wear it like a coat of honor to question Q's plan! Like it's honorable to question other things in life so it's just as valid to question Q. Completely oblivious or could care less about what effect his uncertainty has on those who follow him.

And I agree, he doesn't even decode the damn posts...lol He puts them up as a screenshot, ads some news article inbetween and maybe a blurb sentence re: what the actual post means and takes the entire space up freegin belittling Q!...omg But ppl don't want to hurt his feelings, or they "like" him....barf Well plenty of ppl liked Obama and look where that got us.

boutfiddy ago

1) Agreed, NR is a shitty writer. He just hammers away with little structure. More regarding this on 4) below.

2) His intonation is consistent. Very raw as he is formulating his opinions as he writes. AJ is/was just a sensationalist shill. Same could be said of Limbaugh, but he did not capitalize enough on his fame. Corsi is more complex.

3) Agreed.

4) The pattern of his writing. It is staccato. The dissemination of sensitive information has to be sharp and fast, hence his disdain for Carters' work. Imagine running alongside brass or a suit, trying to convey as much as possible in short order. Keeping pace going down a hall into a boardroom or across a tarmac into a plane or chopper.

NeonRevolt ago

1) I don't force anyone to read what I write. If they think they can do better elsewhere, they have always been free to tune out. I also intentionally keep thing very basic, because Q is often very complex. I can wax academic with the best of them, but I'm not trying to write a PhD thesis. For this medium, and this subject matter, it's better if I just keep things at a very easy reading level.

2) I follow the drops live, but sitting down to write about them forces me to try and explain what I think I have a handle on. It's like the old saying: you don't truly understand something until you can explain it to someone else.

3) I get loud, yes. This tends to make the weaker among us uncomfortable, especially if they don't like me, or have decided I'm a shill (because they don't know understand and know what a whois page looks like).

4) I don't have an intel background. I have a screenwriting background, and I've said this many times. Read the original Alien script, and it looks like haiku half the time, it's so sparse. It's a style I've adapted in my own work, as it forces expediency. It has the side-benefit of keeping things moving, and readers don't get bogged down. You get a rhythm going.

It's actually much harder to write with few words, because you have be direct, say what you mean, and own your words, than it is to keep needlessly expanding your sentences, and waffling around intended meaning.

boutfiddy ago

ok, so I understand why you get defensive about your writing. Maybe you are good with dialogue, but you really are a shitty writer.

I did mistake you for an analyst asset. You have a talent for this.

You are correct. It is much harder to write with few words. This is my talent and experience.

boutfiddy ago

Wow! Great retort!

Blacksmith21 ago

There is nothing staccato about NR's writing style. It is stream of consciousness. I've done all of the above (4).

The last thing I would do is state "Some people don’t like that. They think I’m getting pissy, and complain that it’s not my job and Q knows better, and yadda yadda yadda, cue the boring, trite, dead-horse boomer-logic. Too bad. It’s my site; I do what I want. I say what I want, And I’m not a sheep."

Try using "yadda yadda" over comms while in a mission forward posture and see what happens.

Agree or disagree?

boutfiddy ago

I want to be careful about devolving into opinion tit-for-tat. No good can come of this.

I am more interested in the notion that NR may be a pied piper plant. I understand the controversy from jumping ship. And I read others' balk about how NR was less than graceful (rather clumsy) in his 9/14 post.

I agree that we should be skeptical. I just also wonder if maybe our watchful minds are working overtime. Do you know what I mean?

I do have to say thank you, because you have introduced doubt and I will absolutely be more suspicious of NR.

Blacksmith21 ago

Good response. It is possible to overthink many things. But, not when we are unraveling the "mysteries of the universe". Information overload comes to mind. Manage the signal-to-noise ratios.

Understand what "epistemology" means.

boutfiddy ago

Yes, and I am well studied in epistemology.

I maintain that NR was just caught-up in his moment of fame. I think maybe a GS11 analyst, though not currently active. He is hoping he can make a book or script deal.

I think he is more noise than signal now, which is troublesome. This is why I also disagree with much of what he conveys. I just want to tell him to STFU!

Over-reading into the signal and Q messages is a problem. It defeats the purpose.

BTW, thank you for the discourse.