Honestly, the chilling effect worries me. I appreciate that a lot of people would rather just not deal with the like of Stormfront, and simply pretend to themselves that people like that do not exist, and that those views are not held, but this is a harmful way of dealing with anti-social views.

Even if we argue that a real-name policy would totally kill off all hateful comments, we have to consider if this is even a good thing; hateful comments should be met with rational arguments that undermine them, and show them to be incorrect. If someone says "all [people of some class] are evil", then one solution is to shame them into shutting up by linking their comment to their real name, but this just allows them to continue to think this way without ever hearing a dissenting opinion (I mean, they're hardly likely to bring this up in public, are they?).

The internet has a wonderful power to throw people of contrasting views together, and get them to show each other how they think, and allow them to change their minds. The mere fact that this process may sometimes result in offense isn't a good enough reason to stop it. If someone's views offend you, then it is your duty to prove them wrong and -- if you cannot do so -- consider that your own views might be incorrect.

I know I've personally debated with others online and learned from the experience, and I also know that I'd never have done so were it the case that I would have had my real name linked to the views I was espousing. It strikes me as incredibly harmful for society in general to attempt to silence offensive speech, not only because it means that those who hold offensive opinions can never be proven wrong, but also because it means that unpopular, yet true, opinions have no platform to be proven right.