Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
I'm also interested in this. There's a pseudonymous user here (not quid) whose help I'd like to acknowledge in a paper, once I get round to writing the thing. They have no email address on their profile. I don't mind whether I use their real name or their MO user name in the acknowledgement, but I'd like to be able to ask them for their preference.
Regarding the general point, I think a comment is a good way. If this fails and you want to follow-up further, it is possible that some anon/pseudonymous users left an email address in the signup process that is visible to moderators (but only to them), so that when asked the moderators could contact the person by email. (Yet since this causes work for the moderators, not sure if this is something one should do, and in my and I guess some other cases it would not even work as I did not leave an email, although I should eventually change this...)
Now, for the specific cases. I just read this meta thread and subsequently logged in to read the comment. (For various reasons I am rarely logged in on MO lately, but passively read this and that and most of all meta but then do not notice comments; so in my case to ask here was perfect.) Sorry for the delay, thanks for asking, and glad to hear my answer was helpful.
I would prefer not to be acknowledged under my real name for MO activity. Somehow I would enjoy if 'quid' was acknowledged. However, please do not feel oblidged to do this as I can see why somebody could find this 'silly' for a paper; in that case you could just abstractly acknowledge MathOverflow.
Thanks again for asking and the good news.
In the case of anonymous users, I would recommend using the user number in addition to the pseudonym since the user number is more permanent than the name.
1 to 6 of 6