Some of the commenters seem to think that Q is a bad case to study because it is aberrant in some external, objective sense. I’d suggest its peculiarity may actually make it a very good case to study to begin to understand the workings of a SOCI. One might think of Q as like Phineas Gage or Patient H.M. — severely neurologically compromised individuals whose study was hugely important in cognitive neuroscience.
The oddities of QAnon give us something explicit to explain: WHY do perhaps 10% of Americans view QAnon “favorably” (extrapolating from a poll in Florida about QAnon)?
I’d suggest that we start think about what patterns of message propagation on a network with what set of up and down regulators would result in something like the QAnon phenomenon.