All people are biased, whether they can bear to admit it or not (in fact, by denying bias, one admits bias in favor of oneself). The anonymous fallacy (see here) is nothing more than an expression of the desire of the reader to quickly and efficiently categorize the writer according to the reader’s biases. It is effectively an ad hominem attack, but an even flimsier variation than the usual; instead of discounting the content of a given statement based on the identity of the author and his [real or alleged] flaws, it is based on his *presumed* flaws, with that presumption based *solely* on his *lack* of identity — a logical absurdity.

In short: it is preemptive character assassination.

It is true that to verify every statement on its own merits may slow the progress of a debate, and for that reason it may be advantageous to identify oneself if you are reasonably confident that doing so will not hopelessly derail the conversation with ad hominem and other associative fallacies, but experience shows us that all too many discussions suffer this fate — or worse — particularly online (see here).

The bottom line is that a given statement is either true, false, or indeterminable [given available information]; there is rarely a need to know the identity of the participants in a discussion to determine which of these conclusions apply, except perhaps as unique aliases to avoid confusion, and unless the subject at hand entails questions of a personal nature.

The author includes quotations which suggest that unless we can identify the writer, an online discussion will inevitably devolve into a cesspool of trolling. It is true that trolls are annoying, but their posts can be easily spotted and overlooked. The solution to mostly harmless annoyances — such as mosquitoes — is to ignore them if possible, and swat them if necessary. Those of us who prefer to remain anonymous (whenever possible) do so *because of* the tendency of trolls to derail an otherwise meaningful conversation. By remaining anonymous, little to no ammunition is available to the trolls, leaving only the substance of the discussion to assail. And as we all know, trolls are generally not equipped to participate at that level.

Nowhere in any known variant of the scientific method does it state that the personal identities of those providing the data must be known in order to validate the authenticity of that data. It is a fallacy to suggest such a necessity. Please stop doing it.

When someone knocks at my door without a name tag on his Tshirt or without telling a name, that’s not anonymity. Next time, I will know that someone from his face. But if he is wearing a mask, that’s anonymity, and that’s evil.

When you call people up on the phone without telling your name, that’s not anonymity. Your phone number shows on their LCD display, and they can call you back, filter your calls, or setup a special ring tone next time you call. But if you hide your number, that’s anonymity, and that’s evil.

When I leave a comment on Lorelle’s blog with a pseudonym in the ‘name’ field, that’s not anonymity. Lorelle knows it’s ‘yet another (pointless) comment from mandarine’. But if I change my pseudonym each time I comment, of if I do not leave a valid email address, that’s anonymity, and that’s evil.

My point is: you need not (should not, must not) tell too much about you. In each context, you need to offer people a token that defines your identity in that context. It can be a face (on the streets), a name tag (at work), a pseudonym (for political blogging), a license plate (for the highway police), a social security number (for the hospitals), a phone number (for AT&T), a wisp of perfume (for secret lovers), a passport number (for customs), a eye scan (for defense contractors), you-name-it. If you give none or fake any, that anonymity, and that’s evil.

http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/

Amother great way of anonymizing email addresses is the Hiveware Encoder. Enter your email address, it produces and encoded email link that can by cut-and-pasted into a blog, the email click works fine, but spam harvesters can’t read it.

http://automaticlabs.com/products/enkoderform