Perlmonks is unique...in that it is possible to post anonymously
StackOverflow's huge family of sites is littered with contributions from user1234567. This is functionally no different from anonymous. As are a huge amount of "identified" accounts online.
...that the authentication is also weak...
And here you make a point for anonymous posting. This site's security is weak and that's why some long term monks have shunned named accounts with leaky plaintext passwords but still participate anonymously.
...Anonymous Friend is getting a lot of flack...
So, to help him, you'll force him out of existence. Quelle Progressive.
...it should be pointed-out that “Anonymity” is very often accidental...
Very often? I've had this account for 10 years and another previous that I lost and didn't recover, I've never once had a session "simply disappear" while posting.
Therefore, maybe it’s time to update the technology of the site.
Well volunteered. Don't hesitate to post your patches.
Let’s take a well-known site like The Huffington Post...
Take my site. Please.
FUD, damned FUD, and statistics.
We’ve talked about this before ... and I submit that it is high time to do it.
This implies the conclusion previously was that it was a good idea. [citation required]
E-mail addresses should be subject to some kind of cleanup and re-verification, without which the ability to post is suspended.
Show me your papers!
...because personalities often are touchy here, and opinions are even stronger.
It's only an opinion if it lacks evidence.
We’re supposed to be communing about Perl...
Complete agreement here. When will that part of the thread start?
Re: Once again ... is it time to get rid of the Anonymous Monk?