> I don't get this obsession over AN's anonymity. People have all sorts
> of reasons for remaining anonymous, not least because revealing their
> name can fuck with their ability to feed, clothe, and shelter
> themselves and/or their dependents. No one says talk-to-the-hand to
> Bitchy, who has remained anonymous for a very long time under a
> string of pseudonyms; everyone, rightly, respects his/her wishes. Why
> is is a problem with AN? Is it because s/he offers a viewpoint not
> appreciated much around here?*
Obsessed seems too strong a word to describe the level of interest in AN's identity. Is it so strange people want to know with whom they are conversing? If you've been since since near the beginning you already know who bitch is and why she no longer posts under her name. I've been here ~6 years and I know. AN started out anonymous and has never explained why. Comparing bitch to AN is really weak.
> More weird is this insistence on your interlocuters' having a stable
> identity and a proper name. I can't figure out why this is so vital
> in any forum, but especially in the disembodied world of the
> Internet.
Maybe you just answered your own question? Since this is already such an impersonal form of communication isn't that reason enough to want to personalize their communication as much as possible?
On a personal level I don't care if AN posts anonymously but with extremely rare exceptions people who do so are mostly posturing for their own self-serving reasons. Unless you're fairly well placed on the food chain neither the authorities or potential employers are going to be looking at info from lists like this and use it against you. It can happen but I'm more worried about being hit by a meteor.
Perhaps AN has family who are well placed and would be angry to see a relative posting here for fear that it might taint them? It's an unreasonable fear but it happens.
John Thornton