He tried the Japanese concept of anonymity from 2 channel ...
> > A: Because delivering news without taking any risk is very important to us. There is a lot of information disclosure or secret news gathered on Channel 2. Few people would post that kind of information by taking a risk. Moreover, people can only truly discuss something when they don't know each other. If there is a user ID attached to a user, a discussion tends to become a criticizing game. On the other hand, under the anonymous system, even though your opinion/information is criticized, you don't know with whom to be upset. Also with a user ID, those who participate in the site for a long time tend to have authority, and it becomes difficult for a user to disagree with them. Under a perfectly anonymous system, you can say, "it's boring," if it is actually boring. All information is treated equally; only an accurate argument will work.
You and I have every different definitions of 'disaster'. There's a load of shit and a few hazard zones, but a number of great discussion arise from people discussing the merit of an idea instead of the merit of an individual.
The most I've ever learned about reverse engineering software I learned from a guy on /g/ who's dayjob was reverse engineering malware. I even made a "callsign" (a Reversi game board). If he was around, he'd post in the thread and answer questions. This kept up for several months until public interest in a weekly RE thread died out.
It's very similar to Reddit in that regard - but without certain individuals becoming "popular/unpopular" based on their username and history.
The anonymity becomes more important when an individual holds a minority opinion. As continually evidenced by the increasing number of people losing their jobs for wrongthinking or making politically incorrect jokes like "dongle forking".
> > A: Because delivering news without taking any risk is very important to us. There is a lot of information disclosure or secret news gathered on Channel 2. Few people would post that kind of information by taking a risk. Moreover, people can only truly discuss something when they don't know each other. If there is a user ID attached to a user, a discussion tends to become a criticizing game. On the other hand, under the anonymous system, even though your opinion/information is criticized, you don't know with whom to be upset. Also with a user ID, those who participate in the site for a long time tend to have authority, and it becomes difficult for a user to disagree with them. Under a perfectly anonymous system, you can say, "it's boring," if it is actually boring. All information is treated equally; only an accurate argument will work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRC@2ch
...and it was a disaster because pathological arseholes.