"morally superior to anonymous posting..."

Please (and pardon me for bellowing a moment - THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BEING ANONYMOUS. "Anonymous" means choosing not to share the details of whom we are with other people; there is nothing wrong with choosing that and noone has ever criticised it, that I have ever seen. Everyone here is as anonymous as they wish to be.

The problem arises, when it arises, arises from two things. One is when someone deliberately set out to be genuinely and unfairly abusive towards others, and uses anonymity as a kind of weapon. The other is when people persistently post without any kind of handle attached to GUEST (even a temporary one for a particular thread where other people may be doing the same thing). There seems to be a consensus which views this as disrupting the free flow of communication, and as discourteous to other people who use Mudcat. That should be a good enough reason not to do it.