Hiding Survivors Names Till End

Yes, actually, because it's not feasible to do otherwise.

It's not feasible to individualize which rules and laws every single human being on the planet must follow depending on their past and present behavior, and personality.

It's not feasible to make sure every single one of the tens - maybe hundreds - of thousands of players have legitimate reasons for dodging or DCing.

It's not feasible because we do not live in a perfect world with unlimited resources at our disposal to do all that. The best you can hope for is that you minimize the probability of something going wrong, and that is exactly how justice works.

If you don't like that, then by all means, propose a feasible way to individualize which players can have access to which information. Or just admit that the devs can't monitor tens or maybe even hundreds of thousands of people across millions of trials to figure out which ones should have the information and which ones shouldn't, not to mention the absurd programming effort to create an infrastructure to allow that level of individualization.

Dear @Skarkio, two logical fallacies in a single post: the injustices committed by some survivors against you do not justify those of some killers against other survivors (tu quoque); I've never talked about bannable offences, but to ruin the adversary's game experience (straw man). On the rest, I reply to you and to Wolf74 together: read below, please.

Dear @Wolf74, the question is not to die or die first: two results that I accept as part of the game, unpleasant, but physiological. What I find horrible is the facecamping (now punished more severely by the developers) and the tunneling (the new DS puts a patch), because essentially prevent the survivor not to win, but to play: the survivor must make gens, go looking for totems, searching chests, use or exchange items, heal, hide from the killer, deceive or evade him... If this happens, I enjoy it, because I'm using the potential that the game offers, if, instead, my game becomes the simulation of a salami hanging from a butchery hook, with the eventual struggling to block some legs of the Entity, and nothing else, or I come down ten seconds after the unhook, I'm not playing: I'm literally wasting my time. You talk about the killer's efficient strategy, you say he needs to get some survivors out of the way as soon as possible. I ask you a sincere question: do you apply the same criteria when the survivors do eternal loops or gen rushes? The survivors' purpose is to come out alive: to keep the killer busy for five minutes of unsuccessful pursuit and to quickly repair all the gens are exactly two excellent strategies to maximize the chances of victory. Curiously, the forum is full of killer mains who complain about these strategies. And you're the first to complain about the hatch, or am I wrong?

Your description of the psychopathic serial killer is very inspired and I greatly appreciate it, but one detail escapes you: nobody would choose to face such a threat in real life; as for the game, no one would choose to face such a threat if he did not have the fair chance to have fun. If a survivor complains of facecamping or tunneling, or a killer complains about eternal loops or gen rushes, responding that they are excellent strategies is short-sighted: the frustrated player will change role, with lengthening matchmaking times, or will change videogame. If you like to be a killer, you have to convince four other people to play survivors: telling them that they will have to spend the whole game hanging on the hook without doing anything is not a convincing argument, it does not excite the interest a little. Would you accept to be a killer if they told you that you would have to spin like a top, without killing anyone, while the gens light up in a flash? Not even for a dream, be honest.

No, @Orion I'm not asking anything so complicated: I ask players to be anonymous until the trial ends, to have no revenges, no toxic behaviours against specific people, and more fun for all.

@Orion I don't want to punish anybody: I simply want information outside of the game does not affect anyone's style of play. If the survivors equip flashlights and the killer responds with Franklin, I feel great and is consistent with his role. If the killer sees Brian among the survivors and rages against him because he dared to escape via the hatch a moment before to be downed, it is an undeserving revenge. I wish the game is not polluted by disagreements, quarrels and latent rancor amongst the various players: does it seem an ideal so harmful to the health of the game?