While yet again struggling with putting up reasonable posts here reasonably regularly, let me offer these lines:
"Those who savage me and my article from behind anonymous Internet tags emulate the cowardice, dishonesty, and taste for mobbing of the Nazi thinker they revere. It has often been that way with dupes who defend Heidegger - an abysmal thinker and writer, an immoral monster, and a disgrace to the historic enterprise of philosophy."
That's Carlin Romano, responding to anonymous criticism of an article he wrote criticising Martin Heidegger. He's quoted by Jeffrey R. Di Leo here: In Praise of Tough Criticism.
Di Leo continues:
Whether or not one agrees with Romano's views of Heidegger, his take on anonymity is worth thinking about. Anonymity has more in common with cowardice than with courage—and is antithetical to critical dialogue.
Food for thought, perhaps, for various anonymouses on these pages. Or maybe not. With anonymouses, who can tell?
(Thanks, N, for the link to Di Leo's article).