When is it a good idea to leave names mentioned blank?

Upon thinking about the issue of people naming peers in the project I have come to a decision about a new protocol for the statements.  This new thing is just a very small change which may not actually affect anyone's statements over the continuing course of the 100 Faces project.  However, It is a new rule  which will be explained to all new people in the project.  In short I think the project should reserve the right to leave blank the name of individuals named in the statements in the 100 faces project if the  individual named is mentioned in a potentially negative light.  

In order to arrive at the most candid statements from people I want to use as little editorial influence as possible.  The project really is and should be about people saying whatever they want to to the biggest extent possible.  However, 100 Faces would like to make sure that people do not use 100 Faces as a venue to conduct personal feuds or mete out punishments upon people.  These issues came up within Lt. Col. Vacchi's statement and are gone into in some depth on the blog here.  I do not feel that Lt. Col. Vacchi is conducting a feud or meting out punishments inappropriately, however I can see that it could be interpreted that way and may encourage other people to tread on that thin line.  As lt. Col. Vacchi states, it is important to recognize mismanagement, etc. and the project should certainly not discourage criticism.  However, the fact of the mismanagement mentioned by Lt. Col. Vacchi can be recognized without naming names specifically in the venue of the 100 Faces project.  If people care to look up the issues which a person describes in order to develop a specific history of people involved in a given situation it would be more appropriate for them to learn the specific names of the people involved through that deeper research.