Thanks for getting me thinking as well - I appreciate your comment.

For those relatively rare instances where some back-and-forth is needed, I find an editor can handle most of the time, or a second round of review does the trick. In other words, I would prefer to not have everyone signing reviews to enable a relatively rare back-and-forth interaction between authors and reviewers. Although I agree that having reviewers joining the authors in the research effort would improve the work more than an anonymous system, I then wonder if this process blurs the line between reviewers and collaborators, where the reviewers earn authorship and new reviewers are then needed.