That makes sense and generally tracks, but I guess I'm not sure I feel like it's 100% an issue, especially in a civil trial like this. Plus, in this case, this isn't the accuser/witness, this is the defense, right? Reddit is roughly filing an amicus defending the case, so it makes even more sense that it would be ok to offer your experience and opinion on a civil issue without having to publicly say who you were, assuming your relevance and authority on the subject could be verified.
Most constitutional rights in the US aren't limitless and are subject to various balancing tests, of which this seems like a reasonable and relevant one.
I was responding to your statement that you thought that this was a common process in criminal trials, which is why the comment is only about criminal.
I don't entirely disagree with you re civil cases like this one, though I believe under normal circumstances it is preferable to have de-anonymized witnesses.
Most constitutional rights in the US aren't limitless and are subject to various balancing tests, of which this seems like a reasonable and relevant one.