we can be anonymous and very "real", e.g. a verified reviewer, w/ a public review history etc, but whatever identity he chooses to display to the group.
That gets highly academic about what we really mean by anonymity and what purposes we want it to serve, though, which we can get into if you want.
One of those possible realities is that "real name" is defined as "legal name" and you'll find a long history of people rejecting that: hacker nicknames, author pen names, rebels' noms de guerre. (A survey in film: The Matrix, "Goodbye, Mr. Anderson" "My name is Neo."; X-Men, "What's your name?" "John." "What's your real name, John?" "Pyro."; Pirates of the Carribean, "Captain. Captain Jack Sparrow.")
Authenticity is a wonderful sounding goal, but it still doesn't provide a very strong comprehension of your goals. So if you get past the problematic concept of a "real name", you still don't have enough to really design for it. For instance, it's arguable that "Yuhong Bao" is less authentic than writing it in Chinese. It's also arguable that it's more authentic.
What's in a name? A name is just a pointer. The functional difference between a real name and a fake name is, in the end, just taste.