> Probably they’re afraid because it might be related to their day job :/
A slightly more common scenario is an employer that insists on "we own everything, related to your job or not, that you do even on your own time and equipment" clauses in employee contracts even though such clauses don't happen to be enforceable in the relevant jurisdiction.
Rather than having to "clear through your manager and legal" every little thing to get it added to your contract's personal IP whitelist, publishing anonymously makes perfect sense, where the plan is to de-anonymize after employment ends, at which point (should said now-former-employer have a hissy fit), their own counsel will eventually inform them they don't have a leg to stand on. After sending at least one threatening letter, of course.
Another solution is to spam your manager (and legal) with every trivial 'invention' that pops into your head until they relent[0][1], but that can burn though political capital you may prefer to use for other purposes, and will probably only narrow the scope rather than remove the unenforceable clause.
A slightly more common scenario is an employer that insists on "we own everything, related to your job or not, that you do even on your own time and equipment" clauses in employee contracts even though such clauses don't happen to be enforceable in the relevant jurisdiction.
Rather than having to "clear through your manager and legal" every little thing to get it added to your contract's personal IP whitelist, publishing anonymously makes perfect sense, where the plan is to de-anonymize after employment ends, at which point (should said now-former-employer have a hissy fit), their own counsel will eventually inform them they don't have a leg to stand on. After sending at least one threatening letter, of course.
Another solution is to spam your manager (and legal) with every trivial 'invention' that pops into your head until they relent[0][1], but that can burn though political capital you may prefer to use for other purposes, and will probably only narrow the scope rather than remove the unenforceable clause.
[0] https://cr.yp.to/patents/tarzian.html (my favorite is invention #12)
[1] As examples I was seriously tempted to use: "Python, but with 1-based indexing", "LinkExchange, but for Wingmen", and "ROT-13 Markdown".