Of course, I expected to be pounded down for my comment, because frankly, the simpleminded libertarian wannabes are idiots. They got offended and had no idea that I'm actually a huge proponent of anonymity, despite my strongly implying it in the comment. I want anonymity. But I don't pretend that it's magical pixie dust that makes everything better and has no negative consequences.

The benefit of anonymity is, generally, to protect the anonymous from retaliation for things said or done anonymously. This is important, priceless even, when evil is being done by the powerful. For example, whistleblowing.

So the question is, is anonymity being used in any given case for good, neutral, or evil?

In the case of Facebook/Google+, I think the policy is understandable, if annoying. There's no business benefit to them to provide anonymity, and substantial business risk if they do.