Matthew J Ghio writes:
Just reading this list I'm sure it would be fairly clear that word analysis could be used to identify posters.
Though I agree with some other contributors that iron-clad identification may require substantial amounts of material, I think Mr. Ghio's point is correct to the extent that a party can satisfy itself informally that a particular anonymous post is from some well-known identity. Though the evidence may be useless in a legal sense, that's not a problem in some contexts. For example, if Bob Scum is posting anonymously some risky notes to a particular mailing list or newsgroup, it may be quite unfortunate for Bob if mere suspicion arises that the notes are from him. That suspicion need not be based on admissable-in-court evidence; if it's noted by someone that both Bob and the anonymous author routinely use the word "copacetic", things could heat up for poor Bob. If the risky notes involve some socially unacceptable topics like drug use or pornography, the fact that Bob can't actually be convicted is unimportant. -- Mike McNally