As excuses go, it seems weak. You'd only really have anything to fear if your real life identity was in danger through the linkage, and that doesn't appear to be the case here.Its not a particular secret, it *is* however a protection under the outing policy on-wiki. I am far less worried about people on here than some of the wing-nuts on-wiki. And by the terms of outing, if I do not link them, they cannot either. Nor would they have the excuse that I have disclosed them here.
Poetlister tried to argue this was a Mason/28Bytes situation, where somehow Anroth's good reputation on Wikipedia would be destroyed by a revelation that he posts on the bad site. I'm sceptical. It hasn't hurt NewYorkBrad or any of the others who do so. And of course, the reason it hurt Mason was not simply the mere fact of it, but because he was running for ArbCom, and therefore people quite rightly took the view this was something about his digital life that voters deserved to know.
If Anroth is as open about general details of his life on Wikipedia as he is on Wikipediocracy, I can't imagine the average Wikipedia nut would have any difficulty tracking him down.
Given this is what Tarantino has to say about Anroth.....
It seems clear to me that the only reason Anroth doesn't want Wikipediocracy members to know who he is on Wikipedia, is because it would completely undercut his attacks on his fellow members.When I look at drama on wp, it's often that I see you have stuck your nose into it, and usually the drama has nothing to do with you.
Just eight percent of your edits are to articles.
An offhand comment he made on Wikipediocracy about his long standing desire to improve Mary Gillham's biography seems to put Only in death (does duty end) in the frame (8.1% mainspace edits at time of writing).
I can't see any Wikipedian being able to use this information against him on Wikipedia. If anything, he is more outspoken on Wikipedia than Wikipediocracy, and he certainly doesn't seem to be using it as a harassment platform as much as he just uses it to air his general opinions on Wikipedia. That may only be because it would make it easier for Wikipedians to identify him, but it's still relevant.
Ironically, it is his desire to attack his fellow Wikipediocracy members which may be his undoing - of John Carter's on wiki activity he says "he basically likes to accuse people of mental deficiency while harrassing them." and accuses him of "stalking Hijiri". I've no love for John, but he certainly deserves to know these accusations are being levelled at him by a fellow Wikipedian.
Amusingly, in that same thread Anroth is referring to OID in the third person - obviously a necessity when trying to hide the fact you're talking about yourself.
I am in no doubt, however, that there will be shit in his Wikipedia edit history that undermines some of his postings on Wikipediocracy. As much as I agree with many of his positions, I personally can't take anyone seriously if they are the sort of editor who fights hard for the right to have joke categories, or does things like turn their talk page TOC upside down.
As Tarantino highlights, he seems to lack the content credentials to be justifiably getting away with such things as a fully fledged member of the Wikipedia Fun Time Crew. Motto:Work hard, play hard. Life President: Bishonen. Chief Jester: EEng.