I cannot believe this "study" was performed by 3 people who, in all, interviewed 23 people of whom only 12 are using TOR. This sounds like a really hollow resea

I cannot believe this "study" was performed by 3 people who, in all, interviewed 23 people of whom only 12 are using TOR. This sounds like a really hollow research paper. Actually the whole Wikipedia-editor-who-uses-TOR demographic is probably quite low so I don't get the point of this research. The conclusion just reads as a cascade of open doors to be kicked in: The team reviewed a number of solutions that could allow users to veil their identity, but the authors point out that before anonymous participation is allowed by sites, the administrators of these open collaborations must recognize the value of contributions by anonymous users — rather than trying to ban or out them. “If such voices are systematically dampened by the threat of harassment, intimidation, violence, or opportunity and reputation loss, projects like Wikipedia cannot hope to attract the diversity of contributors required to produce ‘the sum of all human knowledge,’” the authors write.