@VictorSteinerDavion @Crensch @kevdude @Millennial_Falcon

I got online tonight and saw this post was left up, despite the fact that the OP does not bother to explain any connection to Pizzagate, and no connection is made in the linked article, either, which Rule 3 requires:

3: Clarity: All titles must adequately describe post content and must establish direct relevance to pizzagate.

We delete dozens of posts a week and cite Rule 3 because they do not spell out how the material is directly related to child sex abuse by the global elite. We are required to consistently administer the rules. And yet we are tossing them out the window now because we don't want to "bow to political correctness"?

MF, in the comments, you say,

"The post is about a major Hollywood (Pedowood) Director, who even directed a movie about Pedowood pedophilia (Eyes Wide Shut). Hollywood is heavily run by Jewish men, so his comments could easily be read as a commentary on Pedowood. We can't bury pertinent facts just because it might kinda look bad."

I don't give two shits about "looking bad" or "political correctness." But I do care about being consistent.

So I just want to be clear: we are suddenly giving the benefit of the doubt to posts because we personally know they "could easily be read as a commentary on Pedowood."? We are no longer requiring direct relevance be SPELLED OUT for the sake of newbies? When did this rule change occur? Why was there no sticky so people could comment? Or has that procedure changed, too?

Please enlighten me.