Users are discussing confusion around Discourse’s setting that claims to allow ‘engagement from visitors who are not currently signed in’ — specifically, the ability to ‘Like’ posts anonymously. Bathinda reports that even with the setting enabled, logged-out users are still prompted to log in. itsbhanusharma suggests this is intentional to drive signups. JammyDodger clarifies that the setting actually applies to ‘anonymous mode’ — for logged-in users who want to post anonymously — not for unauthenticated visitors. Bathinda points out the misleading wording in the setting description and proposes a clearer version: ‘engagement from signed-in users who wish to remain anonymous’. JammyDodger agrees the description is confusing. tobiaseigen confirms the Discourse team recognizes the confusion among three similar concepts — anonymous mode, anonymous users, and anonymizing users — and plans to rename ‘anonymous mode’ and improve related descriptions. Bathinda asks if the wording can be quickly fixed in the meantime, suggesting a simple two-word replacement to avoid further confusion.
Even when I’ve enabled the setting to allow logged out users to like posts on my website, the same still doesn’t work:
When I try to like a post thru incognito/private browser window, and click the ‘Like’ button on a post, it asks me to ‘Login’ first.
That’s what it is supposed to do? Isn’t it?
It is supposed to drive engagement by asking users to signup or login to interact with a post.
That setting isn’t for anonymous/non-logged in users, it’s connected to the ‘anonymous mode’ where logged in users can create temporary alternative accounts (enabled by adding groups to anonymous posting allowed groups)
Ok I got it.
But don’t you think this wording is ‘Not-Correct’ here:
“Enable… this setting might encourage engagement from visitors who are not currently signed in, by…”
It clearly says “engagement from the visitors, who are not currently signed in”. 
It could (read ‘should’) say: engagement from signed-in users, who wish to remain ‘anonymous’.
Yeah, that description is super wonky. 
Yes, this is a confusing setting for sure.
There has been so much confusion between three features in Discourse: 1) anonymous mode (what we’re talking about here), 2) anonymous users (who are not logged in), and (3) anonymizing of users (which admins do instead of deleting users in order to retaining their contributions to discussions).
We have already identified this issue and are going to at least partially address it by renaming anonymous mode. At the same time we’ll review and improve the related settings.
Ok that clears a lot. And, as almost always, Discourse team has already identified the issue and work is on the way. But in the mean time,
Can’t this (i.e. what I’ve raised) be solved by simply replacing 2 words:
From: " engagement from the visitors, who are not currently signed in"
To: "engagement from signed-in users, signed in users who wish to remain ‘anonymous’
Or does it create confusion in some other way?
