>my favorite part about non-anonymous accounts is being able to find their employer if they say something that's annoying.

An excellent (sarcasm registered and understood, BTW) point.

I am a practitioner of BDSM[0], which is, in some circles, quite controversial.

Despite the fact that my activities are always consensual and never cause harm to anyone, if my employer, clients or others with whom I have unrelated interactions with had negative ideas about such things, I could suffer serious repercussions.

I generally don't discuss such things online (or offline, if those I'm around aren't trusted), but if I did (as I am now), forcing me to link those discussions with my "legal" identity, could inflict real damage on my life -- even though nothing that I do is illegal or harmful.

As such, Vangelis is 100% correct. My private activities, unrelated to my work, are none of my employer's (or anyone else's) business, nor is it a danger/threat to anyone. If I didn't have the veil of pseudonymity here, I would never even hint at it.

And that's the problem with de-anonymization.

[0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/BDSM

I'm upvoting you because I think you make a good argument, using sarcasm, for anonymity. If you were indeed serious, please let me know, and I'll remove the upvote. Thanks.

Maybe we should highlight sarcasm with a special color? Of course there should be the option to hide/unhide the color.

that's right (about the sarcasm)