I've been tracking the issue heavily and so far haven't seen any anti-pseudonymity posts, so would love to know if you find some.

+Jon Pincus I've seen plenty of anti-pseudonymity comments, but no top-level thought out arguments. It's possible though that selection bias is going on and people don't complain about things they're happy with.

Or it's simply possible that the anti-pseudonymity people aren't actually capable of formulating cohesive top-level arguments and aren't being as invested in it as the folks who are in favour.

The Mark Cuban post had a lot of commenters who were anti-pseudonym. The funny thing about it to me was that they didn't seem to consider that anyone could set up a profile with a real-sounding name, but that didn't mean it was actually a real name.

There are plenty of legitimate anti-pseudonymity arguments I can think of. I just currently stand on the pro-pseudonymity side and don't feel like making arguments against my own position. But possibly the lack of investment hypothesis is valid. After all, I think people (at least, people who don't think about it too hard) feel that they can tell a "real" name from a "fake" name better than some computer algorithm, and can always choose only to pay attention to people with "real" names.

Myself, I've found taking people at face value -- even when they strongly telegraph that they are not exactly as they present -- to be a rewarding approach to the internet. I'm more careful when RL gets involved.