I’d be lost if I couldn’t act like an idiot.
In a sense, even the use of pseudonyms isn’t really anonymous. I’ll take Shodan as an example, since he’s one of the folks who said he flat-out wouldn’t use his real name here. I may not know what his real name is, but I do know that his name here is Shodan. If he makes a statement, I can go back and compare it to other statements he’s made. Seeing his name next to a post, I can make educated guesses as to what positions he’s going to support in that post. If I want to comment on something I said, I can refer to him specifically as having said it. In short, he has a name and a recognizable identity. Now, if I also knew his offline name, I could also make correlations with things like where he lives, who he’s related to, and so on… But what legitimate relevance would any of that have? Why, other than engaging in shady dealings, would I have any interest in knowing that?
Real names aren’t specific enough (unless you’re Farhad Manjoo). Picture all the John Smiths out there.
No, what we need is to identify everyone by their Social Security Number (or other national ID number). That’ll fix it.
I don’t think that real names should be required, but I personally made the choice to go that way because I agree with the central premise that anonymity makes it really easy for our bad habits to get the better of us.
A while back I changed my username to my actual real name. But since the SDMB is searchable by search engine. So then my various responses on all manner of topics came up when anyone would google my name. So I tailored it a bit so it’s my first initial and last name. Easy enough for a Doper to figure out if they put a little effort into it, but it thwarts the search engines.
I’m trying to live by the notion that if I wouldn’t say it in real life, I won’t say it online.
Anonymity is a mixed bag.
On one hand, I believe that if my opinion is worth stating, it’s worth putting my name on it. I think I post better because of it. If others used their real names, I think this would be a more civil place overall.
On the other hand, many of our more interesting threads on the SDMB wouldn’t exist if people couldn’t post anonymously.
I participate in some professional forums that require the use of real names, but there are support groups I wouldn’t even consider joining if I couldn’t be anonymous.
Using real names would probably keep a lot of people from posting at work. 
What exactly, out of curiosity, is the mechanism for verifying my “real” name, as oppposed to, say, Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo?
This board is already light years ahead of most I participate on when it comes to civility. I like the tone here. It forces me to actually have a defendable point when I write something.
Don’t get me wrong, I like “anonymity”. Helps keep personal separate from professional, as Shodan said. There are opinions I’d just as soon not associate with my professional life. I try, like villa in his comment, to be a bit wary when I post, and not jot down the first crazy thing I think of when I read something, but I like having anonymity as a backstop if I’m not wary enough.
As far as Manjoo’s point, if anonymity was good enough for Publius, it should damn well be good enough for political speech for anyone in this day and age.
I strike a compromise and only use one (well, sometimes it is taken, so I have an alternate one) pseudonym online. If you see Kevbo posting on another board, there is a good chance it is me, and Gumby_Kevbo is certainly me.
I’ve done a 180 degree turn on this. I used to post everywhere using my real name. I had the same reasons for it that others have mentioned - it keeps you honest, and I used to tell myself that if I wasn’t willing to have my name associated with the things I write, I shouldn’t be writing them.
Then I picked up an internet stalker. I made a political point on a board that this guy didn’t like, and he started following me everywhere and posting after me telling people that I was a racist and an anti-semite. I had no control over this guy, and he actually forced me to quit a couple of message boards because he kept dragging my name through the mud. I realized that if any potential employer Googled my name, the first thing likely to come up (at that time) would have been endless discussions about whether I was or wasn’t a racist and an anti-semite. That horrified me, and I went ‘underground’ with a pseudonym.
Since then, the evolution of the internet has made me even more firm in my conviction that anonymity is crucial. And it’s not just because of the content of what you say - It’s because too many people can learn too much about you through data mining.
Did you know that the Soviets used to monitor the sale of pizzas in Washington? They did this because they discovered a correlation between pizza deliveries to various government agencies and upcoming major events. A big ramp-up in pizza orders to the Pentagon could mean late-night planning sessions, which could mean military action was brewing. Hell, with good enough data collection they probably could have correlated the types of pizzas ordered to the people who might have ordered them and come up with good guesses as to who was involved in meetings.
The CIA and KGB and other spy agencies do a lot of this. And so could anyone else - except that such surveillance was expensive. So a lot of us had a sort of ‘de facto’ anonymity simply because we weren’t interesting enough to spend that kind of money on.
But the internet is different. Now it’s cheap and easy to data mine. Think about what a potential employer, or a potential girfriend/boyfriend or an insurance company might be able to glean about you if they can track you on the net:
-
By looking at your purchases, people could tell what kind of sports you engage in, what you watch on video, etc. How would you like to buy a pair of skis and find out your insurance company is raising your rates because skiing is risky?
-
By looking at your posting habits, potential employers might tell if you surfed the web from work in your old job, or if you stay up really late at night on work nights. They could probably do a pretty good job of figuring out how much sick time you use by looking at days when you post a lot in the daytime compared to your average.
-
By looking at who your friends are, people can figure out your socioeconomic background. They might be able to tell whether you’re at risk of drug use etc. They wouldn’t know for sure, but insurance companies don’t care about certainty.
-
Police could examine a suspect’s friends on the theory that criminal behavior by one person often indicates criminal behavior in the person’s social group. Then they could take each individual known to be a close acquaintance of the suspect and data mine their internet usage looking for patterns, clues, or things to use against you or your friend.
I can see a day coming (and it may already be here in some cases) where insurance companies, employers, and potential partners can simply order a service online that will draw up a profile of you based on data mining which will be amazingly accurate. If you ever posted about drugs you took or a one-night stand you had, they’ll know. If you post from work, they’ll know. If you have unhealthy eating habits, they’ll know. By matching your profile against other known profiles, they might be able to make risk assessments about whether you’re a good employee, or a good mate, or a good insurance risk.
And God help you if you go into politics, or try to rise high in an organization, or become famous, or need to get a security clearance one day, because if you have actually enemies or competitors seriously looking for an edge over you, they’ll have the tools to find it.
Since everything you say on the internet should be treated as being permanent, and since we don’t know what capabilities we’ll have for this kind of data mining in the future, the prudent thing to do is to stay as anonymous as you can.
No. It makes my every conversation too easy for people to find. I don’t want someone to be able to listen to every conversation I ever had no matter who they are and how benign the conversation.
No 
It might help if your name was John Unique but if it’s John Smith, using your real name has no effect from a pseudonym
Ah, that’s the worst name I’ve ever heard!
I’m curious about this too. How could this possibly even work?
As SteveMB says: The internet: nobody knows if you’re a dog. Everybody knows if you’re a jackass.
In the article, Manjoo says he wants public comments to be linked to a real identity, and that this should be fairly strictly enforced–no “cross-your-heart, your real name is really John Smith” stuff, but some kind of link to a Facebook account (for example).
The way Slate verifies identities is by requiring posters to link to a Facebook, Google, Yahoo, or Twitter account. Even if we suppose that ending Internet anonymity is reasonable, there are legitimate reasons for being concerned about having to do so by way of a handful of enormous companies that may not do a very good job of keeping public and private data separate, or just the fact that people may not want an account with those companies. (I have a Facebook account, but I barely use it, never stay logged in to it, definitely don’t want it following me all over the Internet, am not really even sure what the darn thing is for, and in short, Facebook needs to get off my lawn!) Of course, without going through Facebook/Google/Yahoo!/Twitter, then as Manjoo suggests, individual websites actually being able to verify identity is very difficult. (Even worse than anonymity would be pseudonymity–someone taking advantage of a system which appears to link Internet identities to flesh-and-blood identitites-- but which does an insecure or just crappy job of it–to impersonate you in a seemingly convincing manner and say God knows what in your name.)
As to the issue of Internet anonymity itself, Manjoo seems quite cavalier about, for example, an employer or potential employer being able to see (in his desired world) any comments their employee or potential employee may have made in any public forum (via Google search):
Someone above compared the SDMB to a bar we go to hang out at and shoot the breeze. I don’t think an employer or potential employer, or your next door neighbor, or your mother-in-law, or even your Mom, has the right to monitor every thing you say down at the pub, or everything you say in your book discussion group, or everything you said in the dorm bull sessions back when you were in college. A combination of Google and enforced real identities on the Internet would mean that everyone would be able to see everything you’ve said to anyone else, in any sort of “public” forum, and to do so years later.
I mean, in theory, yes, a gossipy person could repeat what you said last night down at the pub to your boss or your Mom or your wife, so a prudent person will always maintain some level of discretion. Internet anonymity is not necessarily that strong, and as the SDMB administration has often said, you really shouldn’t say anything on here that, fundamentally speaking, you’re not willing to have publicly revealed and associated with your actual identity. But that doesn’t mean we should all have to live in a Panopticon. Because your boss and your mother-in-law really aren’t entitled to a permanent record of every single public or semi-public conversation you’ve ever had.
Even besides the privacy issues, I don’t think real names would prevent the Greater Internet Fuckwad effect.
The thing is, when you talk to someone on the internet, they’re a just a name on a screen. It doesn’t really matter if that name is Sexyman513 or John Smith.
I think about the only thing that would discourage people from being jackasses on the internet would be something like this. To actually meet the person you’re talking to, and see that they’re a real human being.
What s/he said.
But, there’s more to it than that
If I wanted my name associated with what I say, I’d say it to my family, friends, and co-workers. Or blog.
I come here not just for conversation I might not get elsewhere, I come here to SAY things I wouldn’t say elsewhere. I have a history with my friends and with that history comes expectations, and sometimes it’s nice to be free of expectations.
Sometimes it’s nice to go where nobody knows your name.
I don’t think it should be required, but I wouldn’t have a problem posting here under my real name. (I don’t really post anywhere else as far as message boards go)
There’s an unfairness quotient as well. If your name was Romano Dbruvnik-Nguyen you’d probably catch a lot more flack than if you were the aforementioned John Smith. If I did have to use my real name I’d opt to go by Chuck for the first name, which is the nickname for my middle name of Charles and which I’ve never once gone by in the Waking. They really couldn’t make you post by your full name, which would among other things put them at liability if there was ever an identity theft issue.