Not a good idea if you ask me. I'd like to know which reviewers are posting and what they are commenting on. It isn't like were voting in a high school cheerleader! We've all heard that speech, "Now student's, this isn't a popularity contest..."

. . . aren't we really "anonymous", anyway?  I don't know anyone here that knows both my first and last name (well, maybe one or two).  I'm not posting my social security number around.  It's not like people go by their screen names in real life (er, most people, anyway).  And, for all I know, the people that I "know" on here aren't really who they say they are.  It really doesn't affect anything.

There would be no point of RIA if reviews were all from Joe Blow the unidentifiable. The personalities of the reviewers are a part of what makes RIA what it is, and if we do away with that we might as well unplug the website. I know some people have a problem with the top reviewers, but essentially dismantling RIA is no solution. 

UPDATE: You know, I think a certain party doesn't like the brand names that certain members of the reviewing public have developed. I must admit, I've done a pretty good job with my numbah brand name and I'd like to keep my brand name. I earned it, right?

No, I'm not ashamed of what I have to say. Also, if you make reviews anonymous you loose accountability.

I don't think making the reviewer's posts anonymous is really necessary, but it would kind of be interesting to see what kind of votes someone would get if they didn't know the reviewer.

The site seems more like Alcoholics Anonymous sometimes than truly anonymous..."My name is Grizzglutton W. and I am a recovering grizzaholic"..

It may surprise the submitter of this item to learn that there are personality characteristics that lend themselves to evaluating opinions that have nothing to do with "popularity," whatever that is.

If you want a quick idea of what this would be like, I'd suggest spending half an hour on "Rants and Raves" on craigslist for any city, but notably for Vancouver.

http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/rnr/

If that's the kind of "intelligent" comment you want, fill your boots, but I'll be out of here.

I think this is a fine idea.

Probably too far, but I miss the old website layout where the opinon was the star of the show and not the reviewer's identity.  I didn't want or ask for pics on the left so spare me your complaints about future icons.

What is to become of RIA? A secret society of hooded reviewers? Great suggestion...from a person who wants to be insulated from interacting with people in a free and open manner. 

Anonymity would NOT mask most reviewers...especially when their words produce a low, dull, whiny droning sound...

The rating of the reviewer would still be accumulated, but the review itself would be rated based on it's quality and content, rather than the popularity or lack thereof of the reviewer.  This would make all ratings more objective regarding the  topic, with no  favoritism for or animosity against the reviewer.