[skindoe]

That's not the evidence you think it is. In sports analogies That would be the equivalent of brian windhorst tweeting out something and then you saying that it came "Directly from LeBron James".

People are not responsible for what their ignorant fans say.

[catalogia]

Is "QAnon" even a person? I am under the impression that is a moniker that has likely been used by numerous unrelated people.

I know believers of this stuff think "QAnon" is a person, but I've not seen any evidence that leads me to believe this is the case and quite a bit of conjecture / circumstantial evidence that suggests at one point the name was being used by a cabal of imageboard moderators.

[AndrewBissell]

There was an account on 8chan which would sign posts with "Q" and a unique hash which could be used to prove the identity of a particular person or group posting. Last I looked this account/hash hadn't been heard from in some time though.

[skindoe]

All the posts are viewable at Qmap.pub he posted less than 2 days ago. Encourage you to check it out.

[catalogia]

You say "he" but for all you really know any number of people could have knowledge of that tripcode.

[djur]

"QAnon" is generally used to refer to the conspiracy believer movement, not the supposed instigating figure behind it, who is just "Q".

[bynormous]

No that's not an equivalent. QAnon is not a person in the same way LeBron James is a person. Is there a name for this logically fallacy where someone compares two wildly different scenarios thinking it's somehow related?

[thephyber]

That's a feature of QAnon, not a bug.

If none of us knows the identity of "Q" then anyone can pretend to be their prophet and there is no way to confirm nor disconfirm. This is why I describe QAnon as a LARP -- it's easy for the average person to participate without knowing any rules (because there are none).

[skindoe]

Don't you think if your going to attempt to argue against someone you should argue against what they actually said?

If so then why the double standard with Q there are dumb fans who post stupidity for literally everything. You would think people would actually quote the source (always ignored) instead of using a clear falacy of using ones followers to define them.

[thephyber]

> People are not responsible for what their ignorant fans say.

This is what I'm arguing against. When it comes to QAnon, you can't know the difference between QAnon, QAnon fans, and any rando who pretends to be either. It's a feature of the LARP.

[gremlinsinc]

Sounds like they ripped off a lot from Anonymous, except went right-wing w/ it, whereas Anonymous is definitely more likely to be part of antifa.

Anyone can say they are part of anonymous and create their own anonymous branded videos....etc..

[thephyber]

To be fair, I think they both likely started on 4Chan, which has those same features.

In a way, it's a natural evolution of the "meme", which was originally a word coined by Dawkins to describe the gene of biological evolution equivalent in cultural evolution. Nobody owns a meme. Rarely can we prove who was actually the first to use a meme (KnowYourMeme attempts this, but occasionally can't definitively identify the creator). Memes keep their virility based on the collective LARP that all humans participate in (sometimes the meme goes away and other times it stays active).