It seems there are two groups on this issue, one who believes the user should have the ultimate control over namedness, and one who believes that they have some inherent right to know X is X.
Google + has taken a great lead forward with giving users control over their information. I can download my Buzz’s, posts, profile etc. The ultimate control of information is ones identity. A strong arm tactic on identity totally goes against the liberation of other forms of information tied to that identity.
Identity is important, but its a question of who controls it. We are not talking about Mad323, but a singular, online identity tied to a gmail account. The argument of well how can I know who Mad323 on WoW is on Google + is simply when he or she befriends you.
There are arguments of transgendered people, domestic violence victims, and certainly we could add about anyone who is not in a labor union, but I think the problem goes deeper than than. Stalker or pervert like behaviors seem to have been elevated to a right of sorts for many social networkers. I have a right to know who X is online, follow them, stalk them etc, and likewise I will let them do the same.
Then there are those who argue if you don’t use a “real name” you are more likely to say things you wouldn’t otherwise. Now that’s a big line of crap and you know it if you have ever raised teenagers. If I am following a thread on Google + I am no more emotionally connected to other participants if i use my “real” or “fake” name. I may have much more emotional connectedness to commenter X with a ‘fake” than a “real” identity.
The issue of identity should be only one thing, that I am not pretending to be one I am not. If for example, I pretended to be Paul Krugman or Leo Laporte that is a clear violation of public trust and my account should be closed. If for example I created an identity which I use to interact online, which is frankly what I tell my kids to do, then that is my real identity.