>>5397140 (lb)

>No Q has never (as far as I know) requested certain drops to not be added to Q friendly scrapper sites before.

after a trip change, BO/BVs verifying hash history showed some anon posts.

it was decided to follow Q's choice to be anon and not point those out publicly.

no problem there.

but last night, Q brought attention to his posts without tripcode because he used the same device - so they were not anon posts anymore.

anons archive everything.

other people than anons archive everything.

am having a very hard time reconciling request not to include posts in archives.

>>5397265

i really wish i knew…

i mean, i can understand wanting to keep some posts lower profile, but then Q could just wait next bread and/or post from another device/UID…

we can't pretend not to know when it's Q, or lie about it…

>>5397294

>“Test 1”, “Test 2” (anon bit and jumped all over Q), then…

it started the bread before.

careful with misinfo

>>5397505

yup, just said careful/pointing out it didn't start with those posts

>>5397703

Offer a better solution, and meme it.

herding is futile