There's a place for anonymity, but like any other behaviour it means different things in different places.

So if someone wants to do good without drawing attention to themselves, they might choose to do it anonymously, and that is honourable. Or they need to do something which might be risky, like blowing the whistle on wrongdoing by people who are in a position to hurt them, and the anonymity is sensible.

Or there's anonymity of a sort in masked performers in a dance, for example, or in a carnival.

And all those are different from the anonymity of a poison-pen writer, or a lynch-mob.

So where does the "anonymity" of people who choose to post without any kind of identifying symbol, even in the temporary context of a thread. Because of course, it's not about anonymity at all - GUEST1 is just as anonymous as GUEST, and the same is just as true if instead they post with a pseudonym. Nobody needs to identify themselves more than they choose to, and nobody suggests they should either. But then of course that's all been said over and over again.

The closest analogy is the anonymity of the prankster, who rings door bells, and lurks around to see people coming to the door and giggles. Which is harmless enough, if irritating. Most people play it as kids occasionally, and only some go on to the next stage up - fake 999 calls for the Fire Brigade and so forth. And the technically clever ones go on to making and unleashing computer viruses.

I suppose sneering at us and starting threads saying "look at me, I'm invisible" is harmless enough, and maybe it keeps him/her/them away from doing more serious damage elsewhere. So since there's nothing we can do to stop it, I suppose we should just ignore it.

And I'll revert from now on to my normal common sense practice of completely ignoring anything by the unnameable. Except maybe where it is clear from the context that it is just an accident, and not a bait paid by someone with dubious motives. Dubious because I can't begin to understand what they are - which is rather lucky on my part. (And they never explain do they? - beyond saying "there's no law against it, so it's all right for me to do it" which certainly isn't a way of saying why anyone should choose to do it.)