[rant on]
Oh, please! The "using a real name and email address on the Internet makes you more legitimate" police. Anyone can make up a name and address on the net. Why does it matter if that identity is patently false or superficially believable?
I can be John Wilson at jrwilson@global.att.net if I want. It looks real and no one will give me any grief about, gladly accepting the lie simply because it is not blatantly false on the surface. However, I'll never receive any email if you send to that address. And I could be anyone IRL -- banker, doctor, programmer, hacker, thief, 9 year old kid, you name it.
And yet the no less illegitimate Ian at noone_AT_nowhere.com -- and it is perhaps even MORE legitimate because it is OBVIOUS and HONEST about its intent (ie, anonymity, and many people have rightful concerns about publishing their identity on the net, and others just want to be anonymous) -- is frowned upon and deemed somehow less deserving of being treated seriously? If I really had less than noble motives on a forum or newsgroup, I wouldn't use a glaringly false ID, I would use one that gave the illusion of reality. I'm sure most nefarious types have the sense to realize that.
So, are you seriously saying you would more willing to help the equally but surreptitiously false John Wilson at jrwilson@global.att.net than the directly false Ian at noone_AT_nowhere.com?
Sorry, but that makes no sense.
[rant off]