Do you think that if you prove that the mainstream narrative is a lie that this should be enough for people to believe your narrative or should you be held to a higher standard having to prove your version of things?

Considering the "mainstream" media is full of glorified prostitutes and literal drones, I doubt it should be all that difficult to truly break the spell. However, in terms of me being held to a higher standard as to proving "my version", I think we should all be held to high standards. Hell, I 'm not sure why we even lowered our standards in the first place...

Do you take people who ask for proof as curious and discerning or as adversaries (shills, bots, sheep etc)?

It depends on what you want me to source because, frankly, there's likely to be some things that I won't be capable of sourcing. Either way, I don't really do sources all on purpose, which has been an experiment of sorts for me over the past couple of years or so. Firstly, I want to better hone my ability to notice Truth when it comes across my path. Secondly, I want to see how accurate by being informed of future events was. Which, if we're keeping track, the info has been eerily accurate so far, which I'm both excited for myself (mostly for relief's sake) and anxious for everyone else about.

With that being said, I'm going to regret to inform you that an extremely disappointing amount of people you interact with via the internet aren't nearly as genuine as you'd like for them to be. Don't get me wrong, there's unquestionably heaps of people out there that are in all sorts of weird places who have anything but malicious intent, but that doesn't mean they're some honest and innocent child merely holding out their hand hoping to get another piece of the pie of knowledge.