In general I agree, although there are certainly times when anonymity could be problematic even submitting an article on HN - for example, lying about an indivi

In general I agree, although there are certainly times when anonymity could be problematic even submitting an article on HN - for example, lying about an individual or a company, or starting a dangerous rumor. The benefit of anonymity is, generally, to protect the anonymous from retaliation for things said or done anonymously. This is important, priceless even, when evil is being done by the powerful. For example, whistleblowing. So the question is, is anonymity being used in any given case for good, neutral, or evil? In the case of Facebook/Google+, I think the policy is understandable, if annoying. There's no business benefit to them to provide anonymity, and substantial business risk if they do.