Who is "the guy"?
However, the author ended up reporting him, so i guess it's a moot point.
... As long as the guy has learned something or changed his behavior, i mean.
Weinstein had anecdotes floating around by word of mouth for decades. Maybe if some of those had been collected anonymously in a public forum, action would have been taken sooner.
http://www.google.com/search?q=harvey+weinstein+abuse&dcr=0&...
That means the person is not kept anonymous, his name is simply not included in this article.
Now, I think that omitting his name makes the article better, because it removes a distraction.
On the whole i think that whether or not his name should be mentioned depends on whether or not his behavior has changed -- with some bias in favor of not mentioning him, because... well people should be allowed to learn and improve themselves?