Here's how anoncast is going to go:

It's going to be fun and edgy for a while, and then people are going to realize that it makes slander free, and it will get noisy and useless and then people will unfollow it because it isn't high enough signal.

It will be more meaningful to say `anon of ${KNOWN GROU} says:`

co founder of @metamask . Making computers behave for us.

You’re probably right about the noise risk, but the essence of anoncast lies in curated credibility. 

If the future is anon of {KNOWN GROUP} says:, it adds context and trust. Anons aren’t just voices in the void—they represent collectives, ideas, and cultures. Signal through identity, even if masked.