Surely there are ways and means of anonymising reviews to achieve both goals?
It's actually far more work than you might suppose to do it safely, properly and usefully, if you have any serious concerns about maintaining anonymity. One could post a well enough disguised review, with camouflaged dates, durations and narratives, but several of my trollops know me well enough to know which parts of the country I'm associated with, so they only have to look through prior reviews or off-topic discussions and see place names that may have been casually mentioned in their company, and before you know it, other independently trivial matters like expressions of speech are triangulating me nicely.
With that in mind there are two regulars that I see du temps en temps, whom I really just can't feel are safe for me to be review usefully; I might inadvertently slip up, and so whatever loss that absence might be to our fraternity, the risk to me is greater - and it seems best therefore to simply avoid. Both are, in any case, reasonably well covered and I've had no poor experience with them myself that warrants warning others of.
I’d say I would review most and close to all reviews. The only ones I’d leave out is if it’s ridiculously obvious it’s me. I value highly my anonymity. I’d also agree with the above that if there’s a very good reason I’m aware of or they incline then I’d give it a miss.
Ditto
