Actually no one has suggested doing that. My hunch is most of us are adults here and can come up with good solutions to the issue.
Wait. Either one is an "anonymous monk", or one uses some picked name. Assuming that people posting anonymously because they don't want to use a name that links them to other posts. If one needs a name to post, but one doesn't want to said name to be linked - people can easily use throw away names. And that can trivially be automated. For instance, by using a prefix and the node ID as a suffix.
Of course noone suggested that. But that's not the point. Apparently, the OP thinks the site can be improved if there's no anonymous monk. I describe a situation where there's 1) no anonymous monks, and 2) people who have reasons to post anonymously still do so. I'm just asking how that's going to improve things.
You're JavaFan. That's ALL I know about you. For all I know you could also be Jim, having a great time playing games with all the Monks by posting a 'hot button' issue under one user name then coming in a day later completely against it under another name. That option wouldn't change if you were Anonymous Monk, Jim or Guest198.
Yes. I'm glad we agree. For me, that's an argument that having or not having an option to post anonymously doesn't change things in general (except for the mechanics of the poster).
You realize this is a big part of the OP's whole point — right? Anonymous Monk can't be filtered out and many times becomes a major part of a thread (let alone the originator).
And my point is, the content of such posts will not change if there's a name above the post
. If you get annoyed by a post, does it really matter if the top of the post is "Anonymous Monk", or "Jim882693" - a name that may not top any other node?
[About voting] You seem to enjoy it. You should.
I don't. I don't vote often. If I want a game where mindless clicking results in some numbers increasing, I'd play Farmville.
It's all great to say "I don't like anonymous monks", but I haven't seen a single posts that shows that whatever anonymous monks do to anger them will not happen if there are names (which can be as anonymous as the user of that name wants it to be) above the posts. However, if the post is made by "anonymous monk", I know it's done anonymously. But if the post is done by "Foo1234", and I go through the trouble of going to his userpage, and find he just signed up, and has no other writings, what do I know? Is it someone wanting to post anonymously, or just the first post on a fast track to sainthood?