[k-mcgrady]

Slight OT: I'm interested on people's thought on anonymity on HN.

- Do you think we have better discussions because we don't have to use our real names?

- How would using real names affect the discussion here?

- Does the anonymity here go far enough? For example if someone manages to tie our real identity to our HN username their is no way of changing the HN username.

[higherpurpose]

You know how we see "former" politicians, or "former" chairs at agencies, or "former" judges speaking on the war on drugs, and so on? Why are they always "former"? Because they know that what they say could impact their career and they could lose their jobs, at a time they may not be ready to lose their jobs.

Now, imagine if everything they can say after they become "former" that position (so I'm not necessarily talking about leaking classified information here), could be said anonymously much earlier while they still have that job and know everything what's going on at the time.

Anonymity is powerful, and not just in oppressive countries where the usefulness of anonymity should be obvious, but also in countries where you may want to tell a "truth" about something, without fearing for your financial situation or your career.

Let's imagine Tim Cook had an opinion about what is going on between Palestine and Israel, and let's imagine it's a damn good one, since he's a pretty smart guy, and that opinion could even provide a big insight into the debate, and it would be very useful for the debate. I don't need to tell you that he wouldn't want to give that opinion under his real name on HN. That would create a media-firestorm, and could potentially get Apple, the company, in trouble, too, over his personal opinions.

I think these are just a few of the reasons why anonymity is important, and more should be explored. Anonymity is important for humanity, and it should never be killed or banned, whether by NSA or by companies like Google and Facebook.

[bradleysmith]

I do most of my posting and discussion on HN with my real name (which is nearly pseudonymous to begin with), and links to my real life. I have other user names for anonymous discussions, which I almost never use. I would need to log in and read comments of these accounts just to remember what my last use-case for anonymity was.

I tend to hold 15-year-old moot's mindset; I just don't see the appeal of participating in anonymous discussion. I will read it (I'll unabashedly lurk SA, 4chan & reddit) but rarely feel the need to chime in without having a tie to my identity. Perhaps it is discounting the power of ideas, but identity is approximately ONE HALF of any communication in my mind; I always want to consider the source, so I don't have much to say without BEING the source. Short of discussions of philosophy or existential beliefs, the source identity is always important to me in evaluating ideas.

Having said that, I've learned a great deal from anonymous users here on HN and each of the forums named above.

I think that the people that comprise them are what give online communities their culture; anonymity does not cause the meanness in these communities, the acceptance or encouragement of meanness by the community causes that meanness. anonymity allows users to remove their filters right quickly; it is the communities that encourage or discourage particular communication patterns.

Anonymous or not, you'll get down-voted and poo-poo'd on HN if you are overtly negative and 'mean' (particularly true when contrasted to other online forums). This is not a function of anonymity; it's a function of HN'ers having an aversion towards these behaviors as a whole.

[manish_gill]

TBH, even if you are anonymous on HN, it doesn't mean anything. The mods here are very aggressive in banning/downvoting to hell/hellbanning members if they are not behaving in accordance with the tone of the site. So the quality of discussion has little relevance with anonymity here.

[aestra]

>- How would using real names affect the discussion here?

We have had many people post candid accounts under throwaways. Some have been informative, some have been mean and hateful. We can take the good with the bad. Some people can post their accounts of sexual or physical abuse, time in jail, unpopular/politically damaging opinions, etc.

>- Do you think we have better discussions because we don't have to use our real names?

Yes. More people are freer to participate. People who don't want to be Googleable for example. People are more free to speak their minds rather than say "could this hurt my career?" or "if the authorities in my country read this, am I going to get in trouble?"

[lmm]

I think we are, for all practical purposes, using our real names (in particular, there are a number of recognizable "power users", which I think is where most of the harm of nonymity comes from); I don't think a switch to our birth names would make much difference. I think under a fully-anonymous HN the best discussions would be better but the average discussion would be worse (as it is on 4chan). I would favour increased anonymity.

[Fasebook]

I think there is no free speech on HN, due to the misrepresentation present in the UI.