After some bogus FOIA redactions and misinterpretations, I submitted a Request for Review (RFR) to the Illinois attorney general's office who refused to continue without a signature with a valid first and last name to associate the RFR to the original FOIA request.... even though my first and last name weren't actually on any previous requests (their argument made no sense, especially with ESIGN in mind). My lawyer even told me that it would be a waste of time to fight it and to just accept it - since a lawsuit would very likely require my name anyway. Or alternatively give up on the request.
Since my writing style stand out like a sore thumb, staying "anonymous" seemed pretty silly going forward, so I stopped. These days, I feel naked when submitting a request and in a lot of ways, it definitely feels like it does limit certain types of requests. If anything, my requests are a little bit more agitated - I definitely no longer have the same peace of mind as before.
For a certain subset of societies that suppress information and views, anonymous communication becomes more important. Enabling more voices is in essence making the society more democratic (or leading towards).
In addition, if you look at what's going on in Poland[1] at the moment, then you could very well argue that a popular service that can't be censored would help present a more balanced view of what is going on.
From that perspective it becomes a safeguard to prevent slipping, even if things are sailing along fine at the moment.
[1]: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/barack-obam...