Anonymous ID: 9dd673 Feb. 25, 2019, 10:11 p.m. No.5390233   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>0287 >>0348

>>5390077

>>5389952

>>5390091

>>5390169

 

>Global

I would disagree - it appeared that only those posts ("private comms") were requested to not be added. I did not add them to the spreadsheet, but capped them and since Q also posted with tripcode on that thread, they are also archived.

When Q team post their tests, I include those on the spreadsheet as well (and BO/BV/CodeMonkey's responses and assurances of authenticity of IP hash during tripcode changes, etc.). I'm striving to maintain an accurate, complete record of this experience/phenomenon for posterity, but my task is different than yours (bakers).

 

That's just my take on it.

Anonymous ID: 9dd673 Feb. 25, 2019, 10:14 p.m. No.5390256   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>5390224

Answer is yes. Sometimes on purpose, sometimes not (didn't enter tripcode completely or correctly, so post showed as anon), but the ones where it is acknowledged are all on the spreadsheet, and you can tell by the IDs. It's important to note that during those times, no one claimed there were any problems with IDs on the board that day.

Anonymous ID: 9dd673 Feb. 25, 2019, 10:22 p.m. No.5390338   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>0353 >>0431

>>5390287

>anything verified Q - as in ID same- should go there

I agree. In this case Q was not asserting it was someone else (as in different person with ID mixup) but that it was private comms. So the request leaves me in a bindโ€ฆ Honor the request or put it in the spreadsheet for posterity for complete accuracy?

Anonymous ID: 9dd673 Feb. 25, 2019, 10:49 p.m. No.5390627   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>5390603

I know, that's why I save all the Q-picture filenames in the spreadsheet. It was requested for that reason. I'm not interested in doing the decoding myself, but since you're here and you've done it I'm asking how you did it. How did the filename convert to what you posted?