forced_anon chat

I know, but hear me out-- seriously.

Imagine this: you load up a 4chan chat page, and you're connected to another user to chat one on one. Completely at random, with no traces of identity whatsoever. That's it. There could be a button to get a new person if you really don't like who you're talking to or you've seen them before, or you could just hit F5. In the true spirit of Anonymous, you could talk about anything in complete freedom.

Someone pick this up and run with it. I'd love to see it happen, but I just don't have the wherewithal.

>>18
Unfortunately, yes, there's only so much you can do to remove identities from a situation. People can still create them if they're so inclined, in the manner you described, but it was my hope that they'd no longer feel compelled to. Though you might think establishing an identity would leave one more open to retaliation, I think it actually has a way of distancing people from the situation entirely. When one has an identity, it's no longer he who's chatting or posting, it's all done through that proxy-- and, by consequence, it's all pretty lame and not very honest.

I don't know why exactly I think a one on one chat system would be different from an imageboard. When one makes a post on an image or discussion board, I think one does take into account that his words are going to be judged by the whole community. Even he isn't worried about preserving some identity, he still identifies with those words and responds to the reactions they get, and I think that ultimately leads to self-censorship and conformity. When there's only one person passing judgment, it doesn't have nearly the same negative impact, and what's more you can hit F5 and dismiss the entire thing, whereas a post still remains.