Everyone can care about things they want to care about.
I own that house and I don't want you to know who I am - and this is part of my hard-earned assets protection strategy.
Why your casual curiousity to know is more important than my desire to legally own the property without disclosing information about me to everyone and their cat?
I'm no expert, but as far as I can tell, "The Law" has been a last resort in resolving local disputes between neighbors. It's heavy, slow, and expensive. Rather, custom and direct negotiation have been the mainstays for orderly civic relations.
Anonymity essentially takes all of that and ejects it. Without a new legal framework to replace it (that you almost certainly will like less because it will both cost more, and demand more access to you by the state), demanding that formal legal means be used in all contacts with you is demanding that your neighbours pay significantly more to achieve mutual ends. All while giving the rest of civil society the brush off: "I've got mine, you can kindly go have a nice day."
I guess the idea of community is pretty much obsolete, but the smallest unit of governance, like say a home owners association, would probably undermine your anonymity if you chose to participate.
In that case, shouldn’t there be a public registry of people who invest in weapons manufacturers, oil companies, and other corporations that produce unhealthy products?
I own that house and I don't want you to know who I am - and this is part of my hard-earned assets protection strategy.
Why your casual curiousity to know is more important than my desire to legally own the property without disclosing information about me to everyone and their cat?