Knowing who wrote a comment often provides very useful context (especially when there is back-and-forth discussion going on).

pvg said -> "It would be a little difficult to have an exchange with someone if you can't tell who is who."

cperciva said "Knowing who wrote a comment often provides very useful context"

You are both completely right. My suggestion doesn't make sense.

It was just a "spur of the moment" suggestion to provoke thought (de Bono's PO mental operator). I dind't think it through at all.

You could give everyone a unique identifier per thread.

That would only solve one of the problems. Some of the users here are skilled enough that the average user doesn't know enough to keep up a disagreement. It's easier if the user names stay.

For instance, the ggp is a security professional. I give more credence to his opinions than others.

It was only intended to solve one of the problems, as the other 'problem' is exactly what removing the names would seek to address: a person's authority/history influencing the weight of their comments within a thread. It'd really benefit people who've earned a negative following, but I don't see such a mob mentality on here as opposed to certain aggregators in which biases become apparent in just a few threads.

Yes, but sometimes a person's authority is actually relevant. Consider this short exchange from the other day: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=841887

On the other hand, when somebody who is deeply respected (be it pg, or any prolific high-karma commenter) posts on something where they have no particular expertise the comment shouldn't get special consideration due to the author.

I can't think of a way to reconcile these, and there's enough people who post here that are actual authorities in relevant areas that I wouldn't want to give up the first. Being able to know that, say, a comment about security was written by tptacek matters more to me than "oh look, pg made a two-word post that got 9001 points".

It would be a little difficult to have an exchange with someone (fairly common in threaded discussion) if you can't tell who is who. Also invites abuse - I reply to your comment, someone replies to my reply, pretending to be you.

People are far enough removed from each other on the internet. Knowing who posted something tells a lot. For example, I've been browsing HN about 3 months and I already know to pay extra attention to what tptacek on security. I believe people have gotten jobs from Hacker News too based on their reputation. I think HN is a great community and implementing this would just weaken it.

"I believe people have gotten jobs from Hacker News too based on their reputation."

Whoa! Nice :-). Any concrete examples?

I remember a couple of discussions that were headed that way; then they reasonably enough shifted to email, so I don't know whether they went through.

I believe I read about one here a few months back. Sorry nothing concrete. I know if I am ever in need more help, I'd go through networks and then ask around here.

It's a community, not an attempt to promote "ideal" discussions. Removing names might help the latter, but it would hurt the former.

what about not removing name completely but making it invisible unless your pointer is at location it is hiding behind? you can still find out who has written the comment if you mean it, but your main criteria for valuing comment is it's content.