Unity is the key to success on The Comms


Here we can discuss why we have no unity here on the COMMS.

This has to be addressed, and rectified. I would like for people to throw their collective hats into the ring, hash out your problems with each other, and move on for the greater good. We are going to disagree on things.

We are going to favor one person over the other. Cliques are evident here I get that. What we need to do is agree to disagree, and unite as a unit focused on the same goal.

There needs to be a truce. If you are willing to offer a truce this space is for you to let it be known that you are willing.

If you feel the need to call out those you can’t get along with feel free. Just try to come to a common ground solution otherwise we are screwed blued and tattooed which is the goal of the leftist globalist scum we claim to fight.

***Poll--- Censorship On InfoComms***
Tos violation? Tracker thread

What can we agree on?
What do we disagree on?
What of these is or isn’t a “showstopper”?


Make a list. Let’s all see what we think the problem is, because there is a problem. Infighting is constant. It’s disruptive. It’s useless and accomplishes nothing.


@Benoaks can you add this in the topic and we can get a REAL temperature of this platform?


Hadn’t seen that thread. Didn’t mean to step on your toes. I linked it.


One show stopper for me at least would be a break down of communication.
What I mean is this, person A can dislike or disagree with person B, or their ideas and ideals.
But if both cannot be a rational adults and accept this and move on, then there is going to be a communication breakdown.

Also, the egos. If folks aren’t here for something bigger than themselves, I don’t see how that helps.
The problem is bigger than any one person, or to even be blunt… family or community… or even country.
If we cannot have this bigger vision in mind that is also going to be a barrier.

Also, understanding we’re not all equipped with the same levels of resources. This could be money, it can also be time, education and understanding, abilities, networks, even health etc. From several years leadership experience herding cats as it were what’s easy for you is not going to be necessarily easy for someone else. If folks cannot have understanding and acceptance of these meaning before having expectations of someone else, be willing to understand each person’s limitations, this will be another barrier. Aces in their places…

Two cents to take it or leave it.


Excellent points, and what this thread is for. Add anything you think could help the current situation. Ego is a YUGE issue.


The biggest issue is simple, we have opposing visions for what needs to be done, so therefor there is no possibility of anything. We have some people who are globalists, we have most that are nationalists, and we have some conservatives that want to keep both in the same place.

This isn’t broader society, this is a forum with a purpose. People who we might offer some appeal to electorally, are not inherently the same people who can organize with us.


The only counter I see to egos is the entire community willing to point out when it shows up in any of us. Not harshly necessary, but simply stating in some velvet glove manner, the greater issue is X not character assassination Y or pet peeve Z.

Keep the I’s, me’s, etc to a minimum when discussion of bigger issues.

If the whole community is of one mind when it comes to hot heads, they’ll have to reconcile or move on. Again it’s not about clique A or B. it’s about humanity’s survival.
If that isn’t prevailing in discussion over all, it’s just going to deteriorate.

I’ve had to lead teams before, and it was a hard lesson as I attained the position of leader by being the best. But It was one of the first lessons I had to learn to grow. Just because I was good, doesn’t mean everyone else is going to match my areas of expertise. Prince and Pauper is the key here.
I have greater expectations of a Prince than I ever would a Pauper. And yes, that is fair.


The best chance INFOCOMMS community has for success is to understand who and what you are dealing with on this forum. There are shills that are paid to be here to stir shit. Once everyone understands that, the infighting can start to be addressed.

Until that is addressed and dealt with…THERE WILL NEVER BE PEACE ON INFOCOMMS!!!


I’m very comfortable knowing when I have sound leaders, it’s easier. I’m not here to aggrandize, or acquire power somehow. I’m here to re-assert the nation as the only legitimate collective entity to control our state. Everything else I’m very much flexible on.


This would fall into the agree to disagree category. There has to be a common ground established. End goal is what? This is what we need. Things that can be agreed on. A common goal.


That’s healthy. Aces in their places.
I am not a techy, I have to bow out or differ when it comes to such areas. So too should folks who lack in whatever areas they lack in. and there is no shame in admitting you lack, only in not admitting you lack when you do. If you’re doing what you do well, and it’s working. by all means do that.


Well yes Ben, that is my end goal, I assert its the only end goal we could ever possibly unify on… to the dismay of some activists.


Please furnish a list of these shills so they can be dealt with. Please feel free to do so.

  1. Joey
  2. Bingozee

Those are two 100% confirmed.

I’m not attacking the characters of them, I’m just saying they make it impossible to unify on the one goal we could really all agree on. The one goal that must take priority before all our other political goals, that we must only be governed by “we the people”.

Listen I’m willing to be in a minority on a position, and not have things how I’d always prefer, as long as it doesn’t undermine the primary unifying goal I’m willing to accept that.


I agree. I have been in lead positions before. It’s not a popularity contest. Right is right wrong is wrong. Respect is earned by leading by example.


Yes sir.
Folks who are unwilling to work as a team, will put a wrench into the mechanism every time.

Can’t have too many chiefs not enough Indians as the saying goes.

I prefer myself being a subordinate, less responsibility.


At least one of those names was banned permanently on the 1st INFOCOMMS for spamming and other things that are still happening on INFOCOMMS 2!!


That’s fair, although one thing also needing to be examined is priorities. A and B disagree over, say, issue X. If X is a “showstopper” for A, then if B disagrees with it, then there’s going to be fighting between A and B. But what if A wants to see everyone agree with X or not be here?