New Link Limit and New Private Contact Method

I have just raised the LINK LIMIT (where you get moderated) from 4 to 10.

Thus, you can put up to *9* links in a post now.

Notice, however, that this makes CONTACTING ME by “too many links” somewhat inconvenient.

Therefore, I have a new method – a PASSWORD to put into a post for private contact through moderation.


Please use this RARELY – I prefer openness.

This is for the most “delicate” matters only, and bear in mind that I ALWAYS reserve the right to talk publicly about anything brought to me in private, as this is frequently the best resolution (and also the best way to avoid being set up by communists and other forms of criminals).

I *may* keep YOU confidential, but not the topic. NO EXPECTATION OF “PRIVACY” AS AN ANONYMOUS USER. Although I will never reveal your private information unless legally forced to do so with a WARRANT from a JUDGE specifically for a criminal case brought before me.

Otherwise, I want a DATE with Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett! 😉

I may also choose to simply IGNORE messages, although this is often because I have far too many posts to look at, and miss some.

OK? Are we good?

That’s why it’s just better to discuss in public.

Here it is again:


That has THREE underscores – NOT spaces – in it. That way you can say “Did you think about sending a private message to wolf?” and it won’t go into moderation!


I have put this information on the CONTACT page in case you forget.

Repeating in text for the visually impaired….

January 10, 2019 at 4:00 am Edit
Muchas gracias!!! 
I have a new method of contacting me. Just do a post with this in it:
Note that there are three underscores, so that if you say “private message to wolf” in conversation, it won’t accidentally send it into moderation.
Let’s test it!
I just upped it to 10 links to go to moderation, too.
Liked by 1 person

January 10, 2019 at 4:04 am Edit
Liked by you

January 10, 2019 at 4:05 am Edit
Worked like a charm! Go ahead and try your 9 links now and it should work OK!
Liked by 1 person

January 10, 2019 at 4:07 am Edit
Wow…9 links.
I don’t think I have ever tried that many.
I may go slow and just try doing 5 or 6, for starters.
Liked by you

January 10, 2019 at 4:07 am Edit

January 10, 2019 at 4:05 am Edit
Cool. It worked.
Liked by you

Test of new private message contact system

So remember – if you use 4 links now – it GOES PUBLIC!!! 😮


It can be anywhere in the post, but at the beginning helps!!!

Are we good? Of course we’re good! 😉



32 thoughts on “New Link Limit and New Private Contact Method

    1. Hi Wheatie. I notice a couple of earlier comments of yours indicate ‘liked’ by me.
      This is the first time I am reading this post, and am 100% certain I never pressed the ‘like’ button’
      Not that I don’t like the comments, just that it seems that some other entity is ‘liking’ on my behalf without my consent or knowledge.
      Any thoughts ?


    1. I have a similar question. Did you send me an email? Didn’t receive any w/ the email associated with my Word Press account. The one where I receive notifications of people’s comments, likes.


      Liked by 2 people

        1. Oh, sorry, GA/FL I was asking Wolf, along with you, about the emails. I haven’t received any from him yet, and wondered if he had sent them out.

          Liked by 3 people

            1. Wolf, the only thing coming through are my “notifications.” Wouldn’t that be the same email address you’re using? Is it safe to put my email in a DM to you?

              Liked by 1 person

    2. WordPress has your emails, and can show them to me if I want to see them, but I don’t use them, because it breaks my security model. My security model is based on Q’s. One source, trusted, out in the open.

      Email providers work for the other side. Their interference in communication is not open to inspection. By not allowing them plausibility for many actions, they are limited in terms of what trickery they can engage in.

      I can contact people privately, but it would only be under the most extreme circumstances, and in that case, I would probably suspect a ploy of some kind.

      I have Twitter DMs, but that is an ILLUSION. Twitter watches all my DM conversations.

      Gab CHAT is workable. I have created a chatroom called The Q Tree Authors. People can get on Gab and I will add them.

      This is not a game. People in real life are researching my security status, as if they were planning a job. They are probably valid LE under Holder-Mueller-Rosenstein deceptions. The information they gain will be passed on to others.

      Liked by 2 people

  1. I’m just gonna believe that it’s ketchup on the Stay Calm meme (and not blood) and you spit it out watching too many Nancy & Chuck memes…just till you’re back…then have at it!

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Apologies in advance; “technically” retarded here.

    Is the password “case-sensitive” (i.e. all “uppercase”)?

    Moderation and replies:
    I’m assuming by using the password when one clicks on “Post Comment”, that the comment will automatically go into moderation, and be annotated as such, viewable only by the poster until the administrator takes action. Is this correct?

    The other day when Q was on a roll, I copy/pasted several posts as they were coming out. One of them contained for links that triggered immediate moderation. I replied to my own comment (the Q post) to get me out of moderation. That reply was NOT ANNOTATED as being in moderation. I replied to Wolfmoon to check out link for the original comment, and he could not find it by clicking on the link I provided. I replied again to check and provided a link to the REPLY. I’m guessing that that link did not show anything either. I let it go at that.

    Note: Nobody “Liked” my reply to my original comment-which was not annotated as being in moderation (but somebody MIGHT HAVE IF THEY WERE ABLE TO SEE IT!)

    I bring this up just in case one needs to ADD TO an “emergency post” that has already been sent.

    “The Most ‘delicate’ Matters”:
    I had to call 911 on several occasions; not all of which I considered to be an emergency.

    The calls that I had placed were all responded to by a 911 operator asking, “What is your emergency?”.

    To the ones that I have made that I had been to be a non-emergency, I immediately replied “This is not an emergency.”, and when prompted, stated that the reason for my call.

    The reason for this it Is so that the 911 operators could coordinate with the various first responders to prioritize dispatching accordingly; i.e. I allowed TPTB to decide how critical my issue was in relation to whatever other issues were going on at the time (I live in a relatively busy area).

    That being said, will “The Crows Nest” still be used for its designed purpose (important, but not CRITICAL info)?

    Note: I typed “The Crows Nest” into the search bar the last time I posted there, and this search failed to show results, so I looked it up the “old-fashioned way”.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s