@alyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @nyanide @sysrq @fba @Leyonhjelm

> Quick question, more out of genuine curiosity than anything else: how do we know that 4chan post is real?

Everything I have ever observed from working at an office makes it completely plausible that a bunch of middle-aged suits would have no idea how to make a meme. (Recall that I am myself middle-aged.) Look at Peter Daou's entire career: Huffington Post, ShareBlue, Verrit. The type of skill that makes your career in politics is, as far as I can tell, mutually exclusive with things like "sense of humor" or "lateral thinking". You also have things like Kamala Harris saying at a campaign event that it's really dangerous to allow Musk to "speak to millions of people with no oversight": if they could steer it, they wouldn't be so panicked about no longer being able to censor it. Or look at the PowerPoints from the NSF report from ReclaimTheNet ( https://screamshitter.club/rvl/full/835374c1bfa10895663d4d1c94500049823ea928fb7e9c47b01a6b7f8f07c091 ).

Fundamentally, though, there is no way to really verify the story. Just everything in it looks completely plausible.

> Didn't the semi-recent hack reveal that the mods were controlled, and something something Israeli IPs?

The Israeli IP thing (which I posted a lot of) turned out to be a doctored screenshot posted as a joke. The bit about the mods being controlled, that was real.

> In that kind of an environment, what exactly is it that make people trust this particular post?

Why would anyone believe anything they read?
failed_to_infiltrate_4chan.png