Is the crux of that argument that sourcing the funding would put at risk people who might support a candidate's causes, but whose safety might be compromised by identification? It is an honest question; I haven't followed that case closely.
So, for example, someone living in the rural south that wants to back gay rights, or something of the sort? That would tie back to the entire Google+ real-names debate, then.
So, for example, someone living in the rural south that wants to back gay rights, or something of the sort? That would tie back to the entire Google+ real-names debate, then.