Would you consider removing tripcodes or limiting them to the OP?
IDs forced on every board please.
It would be nice if we could at least have this trialed.
Why? Are you another moron who believes that the quality of a post is decided by a green name rather than the content of which?
No. This would be chaotic and cause a massive shitstorm. It's not necessary.
>>7453This kills part of the the Anonymity
Force IDs on every board to prevent samefagging and trolls responding to themselves to spam up a thread
Tripcodes aren't awful. Tripfags are awful. Obviously people like moot and OPs in things like quest threads and CYOAs, for example, are the exception, since they use them for their intended purpose IE having a consistent ID where you are needed, rather than just having an ID because you're a special snowflake.
http://www.4chan.org/blog/2005/11/09/in-response-to-anonymity/
>>7470Not OP, but I'm another moron who believes that circlejerking people with long tripcodes and unicode characters in their names is completely unfitting for an Anonymous imageboard. As for limiting them to the OP, I would instead advise the OP having an ID you can click, or having an option to post as such, if you want to prove your identity in a thread.
>>7512>2005Hardly relevant, 4chan has changed quite a bit since then.
>>7436Tripcodes in of themselves are not the issue, it's when people reply to trolls who use a name/trip that's the issue.Additionally, with the exceptions of prolific ones like Komeiji for instance that derail threads with their existance, a lot more shitposting is done by Anonymous, but obviously you don't see it consistently because of the lack of name.tl;dr stop replying to obvious attentionseeker/(trolls) and thinking that tripcodes are at fault.
>>7453/a/ needs them for translation projects, subgroups, and so on. And some /a/utists don't like to be recognised. Bad idea for /a/.
I think it would improve the post quality a lot in many cases, I've seen countless threads derailed by tripfags and other threads that are basically offtopic chit chat between them, this is 4chan. not facebook.
I'm a tripcode user, and I wouldn't mind forcedanon being reenabled sitewide. If anything, it'll get rid of the tripfags with huge egos, and Anonymous users will have less to complain about.
>>7543ID doesn't carry between threads dumbass. If anything it would help with all the samefagging on /a/
Please never ever force IDs on all boards. It may be acceptable for places like /b/ where it's endless trolls and shitposts and people need to "MAK SUR IS OP DELIVER NOT ANODER TROLL" but for the rest of us, it's not that way.
Anonymous is a worse poster than all tripfags combined so what good would that do?
>>7520If anything, it's improved in this regard.In the earliest days of the site, there was header text telling goons to use a tripcode to "protect their identity".
>>7560>all the samefagging on /a/ What kind of shitty threads are you reading where this is a problem?And I am talking about being recognised within the very same thread.
>>7558That's a blanket solution to an isolated problem, though. Banning the tripcode would be far simpler and more effective.
>>7611>Banning the tripcode would be far simpler and more effective.No it wouldn't, it has been done already and all a person has to do is change one sign in their trips.
>>7632Well the main point I was trying to get at with that was that if their tripcode (as in, the tripcode itself and not the name) gets banned, that user has no proof that their name+new tripcode is actually them.
>>7684So what? He can still shitpost and keep building up his "reputation".
>>7684Unless they post more than five times at which point people will either say, "Yep, it's Dave," or, "Maybe it's not Dave, but he acts the same, so the problem is the same."
>>7684>that user has no proof that their name+new tripcode is actually them.You think someone with a name like "Sysadmin King Princess Hurrderp <3 Queen of /board/ !!x52TfsD2" needs to prove his identity? No one gives a SHIT about who he is and whether he's the original one, he's using a tripcode, and he's being annoying, that's really all that matters in most cases.
>>7738I haven't seen a trip user with a name like that in YEARS.
>>7738But removing that name and tripcode isn't going to stop people like them from shitposting. They'll just find more obnoxious methods such as avatars or signatures.
>>7760Drop by /x/ some time. It's horrific. On another note, I really wish sage worked on this board, because this is an off-topic reply.
>>7760Take a trip to /g/, /mlp/, or /x/, or /a/, or /v/, or many other boards.>>7769>They'll just find more obnoxious methods such as avatars or signatures.Fair point on avatars, though it's also less annoying, and signatures can be easily added to the filter list. If someone uses MLP reaction images as avatars or some generic anime whore, it isn't going to stand out as much as tripcodes do.
>>7769Some might do that, but it won't be as easy so the problem will decrease.
>>7797Note, by "filter list", I meant 4chan's internal spamfilter, not userscripts and the like, those aren't worth shit.
There is no reason besides obvious trolls to ever be against forced anon.Implement it right now on every board.
What about a tightening on who can use tripcodes by punishing those who use them frivolously.
Anon are leejun thread
>>7923Wouldn't work, and, again, reputation systems on 4chan are a big no.>>7939>>>/b/>>>/v/
What about limiting the number of threads a certain tripcode can be posted in a day to 2? That way, people who use it to contribute won't find any trouble while doing it, while circlejerkers and shitposters will.
>>7923They were created just so OPs of threads can identify themselves if the thread's topic requires it, anybody not using it this way is abusing the function.
>>7957I make no threads though what every board need is a few more Janitors to stop the tripfag circle jerks.
>>7970While I agree with you (and moot himself said he's getting more janitors), I think limiting the number of different threads X tripfag posts in would help keep them contained, and of course, reducing the circlejerking, shitposting and/or quest for reputation.
>>7957It'd be an easier route to just make tripcodes available only to the OP. Or, tripcodes are temporary, if you use it once in a thread, it gets banned after the thread dies. You could clean the database every few months or so.
>>8014reduce*I wish sage worked here.
>>8020"Hey, can we get Dan ITT?""Sure, I'm Dan.""Prove it."
>>8020But you're removing functionality from people who are known to be knowledgable and reliable on a topic, as can be seen rather well from boards such as /o/, just to try and ease the issue of people who should have been banned regardless of having a tripcode or not.
Tripcodes have their uses. /vp/ for instance, to ensure you're going to trade with the person you've seen post 1,000 times and can trust not to screw you over, or as someone else mentioned translators. But even 'useless' tripcodes should be allowed, the freedom to choose is part of what makes 4chan so great. And I just really dislike IDs.
lock all tripfags in one /trip/ board
>>8044>hey can we get Dan ITT?>no one gives a shit, fuck off forumfag
>>8082There are cases where it's useful, though. Dan might be the developer of a game. He might have worked on the album people are discussing. He could be an expert. These things happen, and people need to confirm their (existing) identity. This is what tripcodes are for.
>>8060Note, it could be board specific, and only necessary where needed. It's easy to put up a sticky with open voting, and if the posters of the board decide that the usage of tripcodes is valid in that community and perfectly acceptable, it should not be removed. However, in places where it's a severe issue and people are actively requesting the removal of tripcodes, it would be a good idea to do so.
remove all the tripcodes on /tv/, the circlejerking epicentre!fuck, what a shithole
>>8179And ID's could somewhat solve this problem, as proving who you are is in those cases as simple as a tweet, and then your ID will set you for the rest of the thread.
>>8179Exactly, and that would be perfectly possible if tripcodes were limited to one thread. "Hey guys, Dan here with an update patch 0.98 will include durrhur r hurr durr durr hurrdurr durr also this that also this. Here's a work in progress image from the next content update". If you want to prove your identity, you can do it at any given time without an established tripcode. Tripcodes were intended to be a method of proving your identity WITHIN A THREAD. For example, OP posting something about a giveaway, or a raffle, or whatever, and when input is needed, he could prove that he's the OP.If tripcodes are limited to a thread, it would be easy for Dan to start a thread about his project, and prove his identity with something only he could know or see, not to mention no one would actually give two shits about to impersonate Dan on a public anonymous imageboard, which if he cared enough, would do so anyways because tripcode searchers exist.
>>8189But you have to bear in mind the people who would vote it as a kneejerk reaction, and the results wouldn't be thought out./b/ being forced anon was a good move, since there's no thread-by-thread discussions because of the random nature of the site, but other boards do have thread-by-thread discussions where you might want to ask someone something in a seperate thread.>>8219>TwitterMany of 4chan's boards are heavily against social media, and that's a ridiculous workaround for something where functionality exists within the site to perform that to begin with.
>>8189Or they can just ban rule breakers and leave good tripfags alone. There's absolutely no need for an all or nothing solution.
Please don't. Tripfags are the closest things I have to friends.But on a more serious note, if you took away trips, you'd still be left with namefags and there would be a surge in avatarfags.
>>8200Moot doesn't care about /tv/.
>>8227Tweet was just an example, most devs have their own website, and making something pointing to their post is usually done in a few seconds.
>>8251well he should start caring about that festering aspie tripfag circlejerking shithole
>>8239>good tripfagsOn the particular boards I visit, I'm yet to see a decent poster wearing a tripcode with the intent of contributing to the board, and only using a tripcode to prove his identity which others need to verify. And again, bans and deletes matter fuckall. Did bans ever really work, and on 4chan out of all places? Even if the tripcode itself is banned, that poster already has a reserve of a plethora of similar tripcodes, or just makes a new one for himself. Again, not "all or nothing", only on specific boards where it's decided by the community, and only limiting tripcodes to threads. It would solve several problems with minimal drawbacks.
>>7453Yes, This. I adore the IDs on /b/ and would love to see them on large discussion places like /pol/. Anon between threads is still perfect, but within a thread seeing who posts what is important.
Yes, be gone with the tripfags. All they do is ruin good threads with their attention whoring.
http://archive.foolz.us/v/statistics/post_count/The most obnoxious tripfags. Ban them all and remove Tripcodes.
I suggest seeding tripcode generation with the thread's number so that people who opt to use a tripcode to maintain an identity within one conversation are welcome but that identity cannot be taken out of the thread
>>8227Just to prove my first point, we have >>8371 .>>8383Not a valid indicator; on /a/ at least the highest postcount tripcodes have been active since at least 2005.
>>8285Then they can blacklist the particular tripcode, that's already well within their power. And most boards I visit do have good tripfags, so that's irrelevant, some boards are always more prone to shitposting than others.>that poster already has a reserve of a plethora of similar tripcodesThe vast majority do not.>or just makes a new one for himself.And get banned/ get it blacklisted.>Again, not "all or nothing", only on specific boardsBut that IS all or nothing.>where it's decided by the community,Who really shouldn't have the final say in this.>and only limiting tripcodes to threads.That's completely useless. It's important to know who you're talking to and if they're trustworthy/ knowledgeable. It creates more problems for us than it solves. Bans work fine.
>>8384Smartest man in the fucking world, give this guy a medal.
No forced IDNo tripcodes for anyone other than the OPIf you're having a discussion then trust that the other person is who they say they are, or get their IM service if it's a really good chatTripcodes for dumpingI think this is fair.
>>8384Certain people may have a use for their tripcode outside of the thread, as I said above, to immediately identify people who are knowledgable on a subject.What you suggest is basically the same thing as IDs.>>8423>trust that the other person is who they say they are,>4chanSurely you can't be serious.
>>8402Long active time doesn't mean interesting or needed, you probably are one of them.ban them all
>>8436You are a fantastic example of the average person with a kneejerk reaction to things you don't like.And I don't use a tripcode on /v/.
>>7453There are decent tripcode users who make use of their code between threads. IDs keep thread posters accountable for what their opinions are and prevent samefagging. Tripcodes allow users to maintain identity between threads.Is that used for "i'm so special look at me?" yes, but that's on them. GA on /tg/ is a perfect example of an awesome tripcode user.We're still anon between threads, but within a discussion it is important to be able to hold people accountable for what they've said in previous posts. That's the whole point of this - discussion without fear of identification breeds the most interesting/honest discussions.IDs within threads, tripcodes for valuable posters if they wish, anonymity between threads.
Just remove ALL tripcodes on ALL boards.10 min job, done.Nobody needs this faggotry.
>>8403>The vast majority do not.Yes, they do. If you launch up any tripcode generating program, and input any string of characters, if it's not particularly long or complex, you get a good 20-30 results within minutes.>And get banned/ get it blacklisted.Again, do you honestly think that "banning" on 4chan was EVER a good solution to anything?>But that IS all or nothing.But that ISN'T. All or nothing would be to disable tripcodes sitewide on every single board. Giving a particular board which is overrun by tripcode users of whom not a single one uses the feature properly a chance to get a solution to the problem, is far from an "all or nothing" solution, especially when you have a chance to post WITH a tripcode, except it's restricted to a single thread.>Who really shouldn't have the final say in this....The community shouldn't have the final say in what the community gets? Are you serious?>It's important to know who you're talking to and if they're trustworthy/ knowledgeable.Then don't take this as an insult or trolling, but why in the evergreen fuck are you on 4chan?
It's astounding how everybody except for actual tripfags wants them gone.
>>8496I don't know how you can come to that conclusion on a forced anon board.Can you please debate the points properly rather than trying to derail it with fallacies?
>>8479That wont solve anything. Shitposters will still shitpost, avatarfags can still avatarfag and anyone who really wants to force an identity can just go about it in a ToxicJester fashion.Its like suggesting to delete /b/: while it may seem like a good kneejerk reaction, the fact is itll only cause a longer term problem. Tripcodes are only used as a scapegoat because people dont want to feel that they themselves are the fucking problem for bringing any discussion to a halt just to say "HURR FUCKING TRIPFAGS ALWAYS BEING FUCKING STUPID IM FILTER YOU GOOD BYE FAGGOT HAHA STUPID TRIPFAG", choosing to disregard the content of their post because they are not anonymous.Try an anonymiser script. The quality of the board goes nowhere.
>>8513see?butthurt shitposting tripfags like this guy are the problem.
>>8423>>8435True, I forgot for a moment that it's 4chan. Still, could be useful as I'm guessing if they've gotten far enough into the discussion to have people impersonate them that they might be able to tell the difference
Sigh, this discussion is already going to hell. Why don't we just put this on a trial, disable tripcodes for a month, and see what happens?
I don't see why its such an issue. On a board like /sp/ tripcodes are nice because you talk to same people during game threads, so your sports teams form communities with each other. It's not different from any other forum, but people get uppity because there is also an option to post anonymously.
>>8533While removing tripfags is not the best (or even a pausible?) solution, the current situation of more than one board I visit is heavily worsened by their attempts to make themselves popular, well-known, or who knows what. An anonymiser script won't solve the problem from its core, as you will still have Anonymous doing his worst to become popular.My favorite ideas in this thread are:>>7957>>8384>>8423I really hope this matter gets the attention it deserves.
>>8620>I don't see why its such an issue. On a board like /sp/That's the thing here, the people who get "uppity" are the ones who came here because they DIDN'T want to go to a forum.
>>8533It's not a scapegoat, have you ever been to /tv/? Threads constantly devolve into tripfags having chit-chat with each other, and people spamming threads just because some tripfag made them or even posted in them. I've seen people comparing their post count from 4chan archive, and setting up goals like "I need to post two hundred times within next hour so my postcount reaches 2000", it's a problem from forums, on an imageboard!I don't know how moot can talk about anonymity in all these interviews and at the same time let this apparently anonymous website turn into facebook.
>>8601Tripcodes are a choice and don't alter the posting of other anonymous individuals. There are valid reasons for maintaining IDs between threads if you want, and they have been brought up here. There are valid reasons and an entire ideology between remaining anon between threads and it's the basic ideology of the site. IDs within threads are a perfect way to have actual discussions. If we removed tripcodes completely, do we remove IDs as well? There are boards that need IDs included, /pol/ for example. This is not something that needs to be removed, but calibrated to the best use possible.
>>8655What is the big issue though? Some people have a trip, some are anon. Most trips are fine, a small number of them shitpost to get notices. If everyone was FORCED to use a trip that would be a different situation.
>>8638Thread creation quantity should be something that's limited for every user, rather than just tripfags.Of course, that's easily evadable by resetting the router, though.>>8674/tv/ shouldn't be responsible for global changes - if it's particularly a problem there (I don't browse /tv/) then perhaps there should be things enforced there, but it shouldn't be restricting users with what they do on the site, if circlejerk threads with no content show up, that's a moderation issue and not an issue with how the site works. Ask for more janitors and the problem will largely fix itself.
>>8493>Yes, they do. If you launch up any tripcode generating program.But the vast majority do NOT do this.>Again, do you honestly think that "banning" on 4chan was EVER a good solution to anything?So why ban for anything then? No system is perfect but tripfags don't need a special punishment for breaking the rules.>All or nothing would be to disable tripcodes sitewide on every single board.All or nothing is removing tripcodes be it site-wide or bored-wide.>not a single one uses the feature properlyWho are you to decide if the use is 'proper' or not?>especially when you have a chance to post WITH a tripcode, except it's restricted to a single thread.That completely defeats the purpose of a tripcode. A good tripfag shouldn't have to create a website or sign up somewhere /else/ and then constantly say "This is me, this is me!" just to contribute /here/.>Are you serious?Absolutely. This should be up to moot and moot alone, we should weigh in but not decide. And because I like 4chan.
