>>3140
>we could tripfag like Ponychan does
>>3155
>I'm not against namefaging or tripfaging in general, though even on chans that had it I usually refrained. It wouldn't bug me though as I could see the benefits.
Eh, I'd rather not. Besides, there's always thread IDs (I'd rather not as well). So far my biggest aid in telling You apart is posting time. But I'm by no means saying that You must stick to regular or unique, non-overlapping posting times, no, far from it.
I'm also not allergic to namefags and tripfags per se (although I went on with the rising tide of the anti-name/trip of recent years). Funnily though, despite that I've still refrained from using a tripcode or role signature in places where it was actually appropriate >implying me contributing
I guess I have some sort of fetish for the anonymity of the chans ethos.

>(and they use secure tripfags by the way for each thread, the anti chan principle applied over there)
Or even custom made tripcodes (though I think it's just staff)
The plus (maybe not for them) side is that they're not portable.

>not even lurking hard can save you of confusion.
As it should be, in principle. Death of the author, yadda yadda.

>Though I wasn't their for those early chaotic threads on /b/. I always heard their was a chaotic group of tripfags
You could stil see occasional pony thread popping up on /b/ as far as 2014/2015. They probably pop every now and then nowadays too, but I visited /b/ maybe twice/thrice a year back then, and do it even less now. Also there's "Official pony thread" as a legacy of old /b/reads on /trash/, though I never visited them, spare for one or two singular times. You can check them if you're curious.