[Terr_]

I'd like to point out that "defend my privacy" is only one aspect. For me there's also a kind of 90s-internet-idealism about how forums should work, ex:

1. Good ideas or truths shouldn't rely on the credentials of the person talking.

2. Less information can allow more freedom of expression in a community. (For good or for ill.)

[tdb7893]

So on one hand credentials shouldn't matter but I've found for large online spaces the energy of wading through bad takes turns me away from communities which could otherwise be interesting. Like I wish I could filter comments for things like "has a degree in biology" or "is above 25" since while good ideas can come from anyone practically some people are much more likely to have useful insights than others.

[Terr_]

IMO there's a system-design question on the difference between:

1. Verified to be X (e.g. degree in biology or over 25)

2. Claims in their user-profile to be X

In practice, #1 would be expensive and hard to enforce, while #2 will get you most of the way even though it's on the honor system. Especially if it isn't used as a hard-limit on participation but instead as a convenience to others, and if you can see history to identify people who inconsistently change their own profile.

That said, for some discussions what you want it something people are unlikely to have needed to codify before, like "actually owns the same MacGuffin 4000 that I do."

[wakawaka28]

I think Quora has features like you want. At least I've seen more people posting there with their real names and profiles than elsewhere. I think it makes the most sense in that context. I expect that in a normal forum with reply chains, people with verified credentials would be insufferable and appeal to authority a LOT.