The notion being touted by some, that government officials, employees, agents, etc. should not be allowed to be anonymous is a bad idea. If such a law were to be passed, this would be a "feel-good" measure which would not in fact be enforceable. Whether through cut-outs or contractors or just plain duplicity, the government would not stop using such methods. (This is a separate issue from whether the courts might rule that entrapment or provocation by undercover agents has limits. The issue of double agents, Red Squad infiltrations, etc. has been with us for more than a century. Courts have placed limits on entrapment, a separate issue from requiring True Names for all government employees.) I don't think having taxpayer money spent funding agents who go around infiltrating clubs and social groups and SIGs is a good idea, generally. But "there ought to be a law" is not likely to be effective. And it leads to the ostrich syndrome: if we pass a law to make a threat go away, and we don't see the threat anymore, it must be gone. -- Tim May