Thank you, Yes, having pondered this on and off myself, I am aware of what and how this might have occurred but thank you for your observations they are appreciated.
I also realise that there could be reasons why the mystery attendee might want to remain anomymous. Although, I do often use my wife's laptop to attend Zoom meetings. When you log on it very clearly gives you the opportunity to change your on screen name and all he would have had to do is just type Steve without a surname. At the end of the public session all members of the public present had spoken except Amy Brown. So the chair said "Amy did you have a question before I close" complete silence, "Amy you have your mic muted" silence again from Amy, so after a slightly awkward wait the public session was closed.
However when we do go back to live meetings the public or press will not be afforded a row of confessional boxes to sit in with darkened corridors to facilitate their entrance and exit. They will all just sit in full view, and yes we will even have the audacity to have the lights on.
Besides what I have already outlined we have actually had a couple of complaints about this particular incident from the other members of the public present. They say they found it a little offputting and also felt a little restained during the public session and that even though they were unaware that it could well have been a man with the false name of Amy Brown.
Re your: .. "Actually, the process of applying for access is where your PCs attention should be focussed rather than concern about identifying attendees." I'm not really sure what you mean.
I don't have a concern about actually identifying attendees it just seems like good meeting protocol and not least good manners for not just the council but also the other residents. While applying for access is in my (and our council's) book a non starter. Nobody should have to apply for access. Anybody should be able to just requests a password and get one no questions asked. Zoombombing security is of course very loose in that respect but at least it is only local residents who will have a tendancy to see the notice of public meeting and therefore only local residents are likely to request a password which is always issued by return without question. The request can be over the phone by text or by email (without name), it is the residents choice. So there is obviously not the slightest attempt to identify who may be requesting a meeting password and only the Clerk or her deputy issue the password. Councillors have no idea of even how many may be attending let alone their names.
My question was simply requesting opinion as to it being considered simply GOOD MANNERS to log into a meeting with video on even if this is switched off soon after the meeting starts and is there any RULE (not personal opinion) why we couldn't write this into our Zoom meeting policy so that Zoom and Live meeting are to some degree on a level playing at last in respect of this.