does this make sense? RE: the "psyops hackathon" in September, explaining the "why it matters" to people we're pitching to/inviting to join

I think about this line a lot

The 10,000 San Franciscans who are about to become millionaires in 2026 are going to fund a new generation of art, architecture and ideas that will shape the world

"Dear Jeff Metcalf: Your Son Is Dead Because You Failed to Teach Him That Black Boys Have Boundaries" If you don't understand reactions like these, it's worth studying critical race theory and the language of anti-racism discourse. A few quotes from Prof. Patton's article: 1/

Desculpa, mas COMO ASSIM nem todo mundo tem um monólogo interno constante? Existem mesmo pessoas andando por aí com um silêncio absoluto na cabeça até decidirem que querem pensar em alguma coisa?

a hundred thousands underage girls were raped “didn’t see that” what? of course you … i’m telling you it happened “not on my street” are you … how does that … what?! “have you tried their food? brilliant” there is extensive evidence for thousands of rapes over— “racist”

new vibecamp event just dopped

1980 - you climbed mount everest? you must be a pioneer. 2026 - you climbed mount everest? you must be an asshole!

search seems to have broken URL searches for days if not weeks now. (there are some search results that show up when sorted by Top, but Latest seems totally broken)

No. Let's review how this went down: 1. I share my experience (which I know many can corroborate) that this premeditated fraud was known, deemed cute, had no obvious ill-effect for its participants --who were openly talking about it after the fact, while maintaining their social status locally. I'm writing for my mutuals, who know that I know things and represent them honestly. This gets signal boosted angrily by a bigger account, gets the attention of some admonymous bros (hi). 2. Multiple people drop in to claim variations on "that's no evidence" ie, my account is no evidence. Very rude. Also epistemically bad behavior. 3. Then, two other people drop in unprompted to corroborate the (implausible to some, just a moment before) claim that yes --this was premeditated fraud. That is corroborating evidence that this was widely (not universally!) known in the broader community. Just as I claimed. To get from "premeditated fraud" "widely known" to "de facto accepted", while also (rudely) discounting my evidence to zero, you only need ask yourself, "Did this hurt their social standing" to which the answer is very obviously "No" if you are at all plugged into the scene. Of course I could spell out many examples but iykyk and if you don't you're not likely to take my point anyway. To put a finer point on it, returning to my OP: "Was SBF denounced by the rat/ea scene for doing fraud, or for getting caught -> being a PR liability?" Since we have cases in front of us of: "Did fraud, confessed fraud, fraud widely known in the community (but not externally, so no PR problem), zero repentance for fraud, zero sanction for fraud" that STRONGLY SUGGESTS that --in fact, as I have claimed-- this community is WAY too blasé about crimes generally and fraud in particular. If that isn't enough, if you look at my conversation with @jackinwarsaw in the replies, you'll see a completely separate publicly discussed case of accepted fraud --and special pleading mental gymnastics to try and round it off to something more minor (privacy of thought) by jack (whom I like, again, nothing against any individuals here it's a fundamentally corrupt culture).

this is my moral crusade

The Democrats are mutually intertwined with a transnational media and political “globalist” libtard elite in Europe and the Anglosphere. The only way to destroy this power base properly is root and stem right wing colour revolution rolling across the core states. When the Democrats are “in opposition” in America this transnational elite treat them like a “government in exile” and amplify their message in all major institutional media formats.