I would much prefer that people who submit comments should do so under their own names. However, I certainly understand some proper motives for not doing so, particularly among clergy and academics. So I will not bluster or rant about this.
Editors of newspapers still maintain the old principle of declining anonymous communications, except in the most exceptional circumstances. This is good. One of the problems, surely, about the internet is the encouragement it has given to people to hurl anonymous, and therefore unaccountable, abuse for which they take no responsibility.
What I intend no longer to tolerate are those (I think, two) who tick me off, wagging their forefingers like Victorian Schoolmarms, and lecture me in a condescending way ... from behind a pseudonym. It's not the criticism so much as the asymmetry that gets me: my name, history, and personality are public knowledge; but my tellers-off maintain a lofty and protective anonymity.
I could ban particular pseudonyms, but that would be pointless because s/he could just invent a new pseudonym. So I'll probably just commit such occasional irritants to "Delete for ever".
I once expressed my views about a writer who called him/herself "Savonarola". I used inverted commas because I assumed that this was not his/her real name. In retaliation, s/he placed inverted commas round "Fr Hunwicke". Since John William Hunwicke is the name I have gone under since 13 March 1941 (sometimes, since around June 1968, varied to "Fr Hunwicke"), I took exception to the curious implication that Hunwicke was a crafty and invented pseudonym behind which I was nervously concealing my true identity.
Just plain rude, it seems to me.