TLDR; people are more likely to comment when their true identity is masked.
This is, IMO, likely due to the fact that people can't be held accountable for their comments if nobody knows their true identity.
Personally, I have made it a goal to only use alias variations including my name for the sole purpose of being held accountable for my actions online; good or bad. It's a better moral compass than acting on behalf of some made up "pseudonym" (i.e. alter-ego). If I wouldn't say it in public, odds are I shouldn't be saying it online.
Note: In the case of my HN alias, I've always included my full name in the profile page. The alias references a domain I started years back and was originally intended to help push traffic. It slowly morphed into my personal account as I bridged the gap between reader and contributor.
"If I wouldn't say it in public, odds are I shouldn't be saying it online."
I've been working on social sites for years, and I disagree with completely. There are many reasons, but here's one. What I think when I'm 20 is not a good indicator of who I am when I'm 40. I remember I posted with my real on some pantheist site when I was young, about why I was a pantheist, and for many years that was one of the top results for a search for my name. I regretted it, and luckily it's falling off of google.
Or, here's another example. I've made a small little community site (yakkstr.com) and lately there has been a lot of talk about non monogamous relationships and our feelings about them. I doubt people would be honest about this if they were using their real names rather than pseudonyms, and the value of the conversation is much greater when people are being honest.
You regret a number of things you've done in your lifetime. It's a part of being human. Do you think Zuck regrets his IM logs:
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Damn straight he does. He'd love to take it back. It's in the past, and I think we can all agree that it was an immature comment by an early 20 something and he has since matured.
Considering that he's built a multi-billion dollar empire off his view of un-privacy, it's not at all obvious that he regrets that comment or has matured past it. He may have grown that youthful apparent-indiscretion into his adult worldview. He may well be just waiting for us to catch up to his point of view.
TLDR; people are more likely to comment when their true identity is masked.
No, the data doesn't support that conclusion at all.
The data shows that most comments are made under pseudonyms. While it would be correct to say that the hypothesis that people are more likely to comment when their identity is masked would produce this data, the hypothesis that more people post using pseudonyms (though possibly less frequently) also supports this data. Therefore, the data as given can be said to support neither conclusion.
You are missing the paragraph titled "Average Comments Per User By Identity". That paragraph at least supports the conclusion that people who post under pseudonyms post more frequently, which refutes your alternate hypothesis.
Of course, there's no indication of methodology, and there's nothing to suggest that those who post under a true identity would post more frequently if they were pseudonymous.
This is, IMO, likely due to the fact that people can't be held accountable for their comments if nobody knows their true identity.
(I'm only a single data point but..) I'm more likely to comment on something the more I can use my real identity as a by-line. Demonstrating one's involvement or knowledge in a certain area can be valuable (think HN or Stack Overflow).
To me, it seems the sort of comments that would be encouraged by anonymity are those that are particularly controversial, negative, or that break confidences.
This is, IMO, likely due to the fact that people can't be held accountable for their comments if nobody knows their true identity.
Personally, I have made it a goal to only use alias variations including my name for the sole purpose of being held accountable for my actions online; good or bad. It's a better moral compass than acting on behalf of some made up "pseudonym" (i.e. alter-ego). If I wouldn't say it in public, odds are I shouldn't be saying it online.
Note: In the case of my HN alias, I've always included my full name in the profile page. The alias references a domain I started years back and was originally intended to help push traffic. It slowly morphed into my personal account as I bridged the gap between reader and contributor.