You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

srayzie ago

Getting ready for that big Q reveal?

SandHog ago

thewebofslime ago

I'm working. I promise. I don't want to get anything wrong. Just finished up with the podcast.

SandHog ago

Oh, cool. Got a link? I thought you were ignoring Voat but it sounds like you were just busy.

thewebofslime ago

I'll inbox you my progress.

There are hundreds of screenshots. It's going to take a while.

Plus, I need a third set of eyes before I make it public.

SandHog ago

Sounds good.

SandHog ago

This is all outside my wheelhouse but perhaps @MadWorld could take a look and weigh in. To me it looks like any correlation to v/pizzagate is probably coincidental just based on the responses you are getting.

thewebofslime ago

Now that I have seen what everyone has had to say about it; I'm ready to include the part where, after the "How to Compete with David Brock" post, I had people send me PM's explaining that Vindicator was going to try to get me banned. My SOP of setting honesty traps (as explained in my post a year ago) then exposed his true nature, where he repeatedly lied, insulted and wanted everyone to think I've been a "sleeper shill" for three years.

Leaving out the opening gambit was the best way to set the honesty trap because I didn't know who was telling the truth, relying merely on basic human psychology to learn the truth. This is exactly what Trump is doing to his enemies, it is exactly what I've done to opponents in court and it works every time against people who are dishonest to expose their true motivations.

any correlation to v/pizzagate is probably coincidental

My post only has two downvotes and, coincidentally, had two low level, amateurish probes that were manually entered. It basically looked like someone was trying out "hacking" for their very first time on my site within minutes of Vindicators first insults, where his credentials have matching characteristics to a lot of other accounts that have correlations between them.

Passwords like "iloveyou" may not be good indicators, since they are so common, but 100 accounts that all have passwords that start with "fnonf_$" become increasingly suspicious and less likely to be a coincidence; especially when they span gmail accounts, caci.com accounts and qinetiq.com accounts and include "iamq" in the account names.

think- ago

It basically looked like someone was trying out "hacking" for their very first time on my site within minutes of Vindicators first insults, where his credentials have matching characteristics to a lot of other accounts that have correlations between them.

Your post has had more than 5,000 views now. It was posted seven days ago. (Would anyone maybe have an archive - @shewhomustbeobeyed maybe?) It must have had hundreds of views the day you posted it.

Why on earth do you think that @Vindicator was the one who hacked your computer?

He would never do such a thing, and apart from that, he isn't even tech savvy enough for hacking someone's computer (I know this because we frequently discussed the CPP hacks, and the hackers' claims at the time).

And why on earth don't you just contact @PuttItOut, the owner of Voat, when you think one of the mods hacked your computer, as @Vindicator suggested?

These are serious allegations. This needs to be investigated by the admins, and not discussed on the public threads the way you are doing it.

I already explained to you why @Vindicator quoted the 'IAmQ' post. It's a damn good post, with lots of important info. It's totally normal that he likes the post, and it's not a 'long-forgotten post', as you said, he reposted it three months ago, as I showed, and I bet that many here will remember it well.

@SandHog @srayzie

think- ago

Thank you!