There’s a unilateralist’s curse issue here—if there are (say) 100 people who know the identities of Alice and Chloe, does only one of them have to decide breaching the psuedonyms would be justified?
[Edit to add: I think the questions Geoffrey is asking are worthwhile ones to ask. I am just struggling to see how an appropriate decision to unmask could be made given the community’s structure without creating this problem. I don’t see a principled basis for declaring that, e.g., CHSP can legitimately decide to unmask but everyone else had better not.]
There’s a unilateralist’s curse issue here—if there are (say) 100 people who know the identities of Alice and Chloe, does only one of them have to decide breaching the psuedonyms would be justified?
[Edit to add: I think the questions Geoffrey is asking are worthwhile ones to ask. I am just struggling to see how an appropriate decision to unmask could be made given the community’s structure without creating this problem. I don’t see a principled basis for declaring that, e.g., CHSP can legitimately decide to unmask but everyone else had better not.]