the funny thing is even if they do a good job of enforcing a permissible pseudonym/autonym policy, that still means I probably won't use the service. I'm not interested in using the service which requires me to link it to a specific online identity, whether that be my real name, this identity (by which I am known to many, many people), or some other.

I would be interested in using the service which allowed me to set up specific identities for specific purposes, as DW and LJ do, that were completely not linked to each other. Yes, I understand that such accounts can be used for abuse, but anyone who thinks that people don't abuse each other under their real names has never read the comments on a news site.

I feel about the anti-pseudonymity people much the way I feel about rules preventing me from buying large packs of Sudafed during cold season and forcing me to show photo ID to buy it: why is it that just because the goddamn tweakers use Sudafed to make crystal meth, I have to lose privacy and have more difficulty treating my congestion, for a completely legitimate use of the drug? Why is it that just because trolls and griefers used pseudonymity as one of their many weapons, I can't use pseudonymity in utilitarian legitimate fashion for communicating with people online?