As it was written tripcode is kind of hash function* done by the webpage on the server side on your "password".

doesnt that mean a new tripcode could be ANYONE calling themselves Q?

In theory - yes.Of course user style and so on. I don't simply understand why Q were not using just gpg. Simple:

gpg --output message.sig --detach-sig message.txt

cat message.txt >> end_message

cat message.sig >> end_message

after generating the key: https://docs.github.com/en/github/authenticating-to-github/generating-a-new-gpg-key

and putting it out in one comment might be wiser I think,but I guess "it is for crypto geeks" and quite unsuitable for twitter isn't it ;)

But I suppose because it was posted on some chans caring so much about authenticity was against netiquette,"problem" with redirecting gpg password generation through tor or laziness.

*hash function if you don't know is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_function

As it was written tripcode is kind of hash function done by the webpage on the server side on your "password".

doesnt that mean a new tripcode could be ANYONE calling themselves Q?

In theory - yes.Of course user style and so on. I don't simply understand why Q were not using just gpg. Simple:

*gpg --output message.sig --detach-sig message.txt

cat message.txt >> end_message

cat message.sig >> end_message*

after generating the key: https://docs.github.com/en/github/authenticating-to-github/generating-a-new-gpg-key

and putting it out in one comment might be wiser I think,but I guess "it is for crypto geeks" and quite unsuitable for twitter isn't it ;)

But I suppose because it was posted on some chans caring so much about authenticity was against netiquette or something.