I’m not sure what Disqus was really trying to say in this giant image. I think they were attempting to defend comments (their business, as an embeddable comment system) in response to the recent anti-comment discussions around these parts.
Their conclusion was that most good comments come from people who don’t give their real name, and I guess the implication is that sites without comments (like mine) that prompt people to respond publicly from their own online identities elsewhere are suffering as a result.
But Disqus gives commenters the choice to post anonymously, under pseudonyms, or using their real names. You can type whatever you want into those boxes. Given that choice, of course most people wouldn’t put their real names in. It’s not worth it. Most people lack the fortitude to attach their real names to debatable public opinions.
All Disqus’ data shows is that most people smart enough to write coherent comments are also smart enough to dodge the risks of attaching their names to them.
To show how anonymity affects comment quality and volume, you need to test the same community both ways: forcing everyone to use real names, and forcing everyone not to.
(Matt Gemmell responds well to Disqus’ post, too.)