Both Moot and the author are correct.

It is well accepted that anonymity brings out the worst in people (the author has said so himself). It is also understood that context guides behaviours. For example, one might be more disinhibited on a tropical holiday. Another example is footballers behaving badly on tours. Another one is the unbelievable atrocities soldiers commit away from their home "context".

Moot's thesis is that people become interesting when you provide them a different context, while the author is saying that it is far healthier to have one well integrated identity.