This is ridiculous.
You, on the other hand, have no idea how the counterfeit fashion economy works.
It’s actually extremely time- and labor-intensive to knock off an obscure item that the Chinese copiers were not already producing. And they only produce things that they believe there will be a large demand for — think LV print bags, distinctive signature brand jewelry, designer dresses that made a stir during their debut on the runway.
There would be absolutely no reason to mass-produce a copy of an obscure scarf like this, with zero historical or projected market demand. So for this to be that would mean someone went to factories in China (you really have to go and negotiate/discuss in person as a show of respect/to make sure they are credibly producing the product you want replicated), negotiated in Chinese, and somehow now this product has been produced for market. Because, again, they don’t do one-offs of non-existent knockoffs. They have MOQs, minimum order quantities, in the hundreds or thousands.
This was a long answer. But you said something really ignorant. I’m going to assume you did so unintentionally, but I’m suspicious you’re trying to poison the well on what is at least an intriguing detail here.
Edit: Those under me were correct to point out that the Sidney channel on there is not officially her. I think she may be on CloutHub? Unsure.
There wasn’t an “insurrection at the Capitol.”
I would say you’re using the enemy’s lies to try to poison the well here, but it’s obvious you are the enemy. A leftist.
Did you get your shill talking points from the same script the mockingbird media uses?
Respectfully, this makes no sense. Gab owns their own servers (not cloud, like AWS). They’re fully funded by user donations in the form of merch purchases and “Pro” subscriptions.
Oh, and also, Visa and MasterCard have banned them from taking payments, so you have to pay by eCheck or mail a check. All of these are reasons why Gab would presumably be more concerned about a flood of traffic bombing their servers, and yet they’ve never required a phone number.
My tinfoil headgear makes me think the establishment-backed and establishment-pushed Parler wanted those numbers for something else, if not now then maybe later.
True. Also on the technological aspect — the Parler UI is unexciting to me, and why in the world do they require a phone number for signup? That seems ridiculously tone deaf for an audience that rightly worries about doxxing and privacy.
If I’m honest, aside from the technological aspects (which are important), the Parler founder guy John sounds a bit whiny and passive to me in his posts, and just doesn’t give off “on top of his shit” vibes. (I also find grammatical and usage errors in every single thing he posts, though that feels slightly petty to nitpick. Still, details!)
I signed up for Gab a couple years ago but didn’t do anything with it. Have been getting their emails — finally read one and decided to go all in on the platform. Sign up and you’ll see what I mean; the founder is a whip-smart, hilarious troll. He often posts his replies to press inquiries, for example. A recent one had a line about “liberal bimbos from the New York Times.” The idea of blue-haired professional problem glasses models reading this and not getting their juicy quote for a story makes me laugh.
He also signs his emails “Christ is King.” I’m pretty agnostic, but that just feels so unapologetically brave given the atmosphere.
It’s pretty unfortunate (and maybe kind of suspicious?) that the inferior (in my opinion) Parler got such a big push up to this point. Oh well.
I know, I shouldn’t engage. I get frustrated, and like KekistaniMemeLord said, sometimes I want to expose their obvious tactics to show others how to spot them.
While I agree mods are awesome and working at full bore, certain bad actors (Anaconda, QuranIsToiletPaper, RonaldDregan, EPic, and others) persist! I hate seeing them and their lies.
Also, hey, I have a one-word username. 😅 But I know what you mean.
Hint: Anyone who uses the term “q-tard” wants infighting, because he or she is a bot, shill or fed. I’m serious. It’s such a needlessly disrespectful term to use for people who — perhaps misguided about there being a “Plan,” maybe not — have their heart in the right place and are obviously ride or die Trump fans.
One stylistic shill tactic is to inflame tensions with rash words, too many exclamation points, too-large font, etc.
“Legitimate peaceful movement and solutions”
Dude, look at your name. Look at the posts you made on the 6th. Selected excerpts:
“CROSS THE RUBICON, THE POLICE ARE NOT OUR FRIENDS”
“Stop being nice, stop being friendly. This has gotten us nowhere”
“CROSS THE RUBICON CROSS THE RUBICON CROSS THE RUBICON”
Has there been a script change to your shill narrative?
You’re fake. You’re a gaslighter. You’re not a real pede. You should be ashamed.
Hey, great point.
And on the night of the 5th, just about the only place where you could find a detailed, well-reasoned projection of why Pence was not on Trump’s side and why he would betray him, was on a site called Neon Revolt.
“Omg! But that’s a silly-sounding name! I’m going to dismiss everything and smear anyone who even reads this!” —OP
It’s not hard to believe. This poster is either being malicious in trying to seed doubt about something that deserves another look, or has a bizarrely antiquated idea that alt news sites are inferior to, what, The New York Times and Washington Post? Yeah, I’ll bet those outlets will tell us the whole truth about globalist figures!
This is a classic, well-documented COINTELPRO strategy. Scream “conspiracy theorist!” “wingnut” “q-tard” or whatever in an attempt to shut down even a calm discussion of ideas.
Such great points. I’ve said before I think we need a doc that runs down the most common types of disinfo and misinfo permanently stickied to the top or sidebar. It’s that important. We are at war.
I think unfortunately many are naive about all the posters with nefarious motives here. I see so many say something like, “just checked post history and this person’s legit!” Not that simple. People need to learn about the thread sliders, consensus crackers, instigators, honey pots ... I could go on.
On another note, I was on this site for the period this poster is talking about, and “being taken over by conspiracy theorists” was not the vibe at all. Holy gaslight. Actually, there were a couple people discussing the (very weird) Vatican blackout and possible gunshots, and TONS UPON TONS of extremely coordinated post slide attempts with low-effort shitposts like: “breaking! Trump to have his Barnes & Noble points card revoked!” and such.
YES. I was just going to post this myself. The coordinated dumbassery is mindboggling. Please, spin up a derivative half-baked joke about Trump being banned from his Subway loyalty punch card or whatever.
What do they not want us discussing, then? Gonna say VATICAN and PAKISTAN. got it, glowers. I’ll dig into those topics.
Really, though? On the night of the 5th, and days leading up, we were pretty filled up with Silver Fox/Johnny Quest/Pence to save the Republic memes. And everything mentioning Lin/CodemonkeyZ's warnings against Pence was downvoted to hell and drowned out with cries of "Q-TARD GRIFTER!"
Perfectly stated. Why are these guys so schizo?? Poso has his moments too but is smart enough to be more subtle and not come off as straight up bipolar. Scott Adams also. I don't get the vacillating. Either they're weird intel assets playing roles or compromised or just some really principled adherents to devil's advocacy or something. Nevermind, who cares -- like you said, I won't waste my time analyzing!
Oh, you're right! Also I remember something about in the recent GA race, live voter data was sent to Pakistan in real time, compared to some rolls that they for some reason had over there, matched to different names and sent back. Or something like that; I think I butchered it. So said Patrick Byrne.
Thanks for posting. The tone of this Jayden guy’s tweet sounds like textbook agent provocateur. Highly suspicious. I’ll just leave it at that for now. Ask lots of questions. Consider research. View footage and accounts critically ...