>>311454>>311430>you'll probably try to pull the "That's not me" shit!>no, you're a redditor!Stop it you two.
Having ID's sucks, if only because it breaks the posting mechanics used for the rest of the site. The nature of the conversations DO change, and everything said in
>>311454 is accurate. If someone doesn't feel that way, maybe you were "lucky" not to have unpopular opinions, but I hate my thread persona revolving around mistakes I've done before. It's not even about making great mistakes, but even if your opinion is slightly different people will be prejudiced for your next post, irrespective of being in favor or against. But we are not going anywhere if you are convinced that everyone against ID's just wants to make foul conversation.
But defending thread ID's is nowhere near being a reddit mindset.
In interest-based boards like /co/, /mu/ or /a/, samefagging could only be for baiting or inefficient shilling
In porn boards samefagging doesn't even make sense, anything you could pull would be 90% lesse productive
In production boards like /i/, /ic/, /diy/, what are you gonna do? Try to post you own stuff twice?
But everything that guy said is true too. In political matters, samefagging can be used for many, many forms of bullshit. And /his/ WILL be political, in many ways.
I think the board shouldn't have ID's during the testing period.
Unlike the "festering generals" where there's a possible argument to have them banned from the start, intruducing ID's can be done much later, with immediate effect and no falloff, so I say they are only used when proved really necessary.
BUT, it's important to discuss it now, because convincing administration and modereation of the possibility of ID's when the board is up and running will be almost impossible. It would be unfair that the case for ID's won't be even heard, so I say we tell Hiro about the possible futures ID's now.
tl;dr: both right, let's try no ID's first, but be open to the idea
