Larry Sanger

I think what's important, though, here is not to make all of the editors anonymous, but make the ones anonymous who actually have a reason to be anonymous anonymous.

Perhaps, yes, yes.

I see.

There's no need for all of the leadership, especially of the English Wikipedia, to be anonymous.

And it's actually very important that somebody be able to take responsibility for what's going on because Wikipedia has become an engine of defamation sometimes.

Sure.

I think it depends on a lot of things.

Let's put it this way.

Let's suppose there were some Wikipedian who just happened to be really influential.

So the person was named, like my proposal is adopted.

And so because the person was a bureaucrat, therefore he had to reveal his name.

He agreed and agreed.

And then after that, you know, he became like this massively influential figure, like a media figure who is followed and so forth.

And when he would weigh in on Wikipedia, people would listen and so forth.

I can easily imagine this happening.

And then, of course, there are death threats, right?

Well, should Wikipedia then give such a person a security detail?

Yeah, they should.

It's that important.

I suppose they should.