Topics about "Anonymous" on ATS

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


SpartanKingLeonidas, I wonder what your namesake would think of your idea of non-violent action when he opposed the army of Persia? What would the signers of our Declaration of Independence say to your recommendation of non-violence and remaining within the law when they broke every law in the book to form a new nation? Every single one of those men knew that if they lost the war they had started in defense of their rights they would be convicted of treason and hanged. How can laws which are unjust to begin with not be broken in the fight against such tyranny?

Originally posted by silent thunder
I think Skeptic Overlord's way of handling the problem is simple and elegant, and appeals to root ATS values in both spirit and letter. So once again, the board quality has been preserved. If the issue grows in significance, might the board consider a "Cyberwars" Subforum? That strikes me as another possible solution to thread proliferation. At some point the issue might warrant it...or perhaps it will all blow over soon. Stay tuned to find out...

edit on 7/13/11 by silent thunder because: (no reason given)

They could Title the new forum "Ganfalloon Nerd Rage"

Granfalloon definition,

it is a group of people who outwardly choose or claim to have a shared identity or purpose, but whose mutual association is actually meaningless

Source

As a newbee here on ATS I never quite understood
the situation with "Anonymous". There is a lot to absorb
on this site. Thank you for helping me understand this
portion of ATS and "Anonymous"

I appreciate the clarification and with most matters I am a mere observer and will try to formulate only an opinion on topics that I am more familiar with. This group is new to me and so I will research and come up with my own opinion. One thing is for sure I LOVE ATS and I am so glad to belong to such a group where ideas are discussed that are not typical in the msm.

Peace and love to you all! xoxoxox

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
I'd like to follow up with a bit of opinion, that doesn't necessarily belong in the opening announcement post.

While I can appreciate the apparent long-term goals of the movement -- meaningful social change for the betterment of all -- I can't necessarily condone some of the more extreme methods, or some of the more recent commercial/consumer "targets." But still, that's all open for discussion.

However, I have a serious concern that the movement has been polluted in the same way the "Tea Party" has been polluted. Individuals with less than noble ideals are claiming association with the movement, diluting the original message, and causing significant confusion. And, even more recently, those with seemingly no ideals are just clinging to the moniker because it's currently "fashionable" for those who aspire to be subversive. I can't but think (and hope) that the originators of the movement are stepping back and shaking their heads in bewilderment.

I have some rather serious concerns that, like what happened with the Tea Party, the original ideals of the "Anonymous" movement will be marginalized because of this.

edit on 13-7-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)

Yes indeed S.O.
Most agreed man, Good post!
Like most things... a few are making the rest seem spoiled (as in fruit or milk, not children). lol
Of the many who are in it for "the right reasons", so many more are in it, simply to "be in it" .
Well said dude.

Nice-nine

reply to post by TinfoilTP

Bonus points for working in a Kurt Vonnegut reference.

I especially like how this applies:

If you wish to study a granfalloon, just remove the skin of a toy balloon. — Bokonon

Just so.

My rule of thumb: "Anyone who claims to be Anonymous, isn't."

It works on so many levels.

Busy, busy, busy.

Sorry if I sound dense or stupid. Well, not actually, but...

What is the issue here that required an announcement thread?

From what I can tell, there is some mysterious group called Anonymous that has some bad apples that came to ATS and broke a few rules.

So their posts were trashed by admin.

They screamed censorship. And maybe even anti-Anon bias.

ATS is falling over itself to say we're really just enforcing the rules and don't mean to single them out. We actually see eye to eye with them on many matters.

Right? Is that about it?

Or are we afraid of getting hacked by Anon?

Please, explain it to me like I'm a 10 year old. Thanks.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
What has happened, over the past few days, is the removal of posts or threads that reference "Anonymous," that have run afoul of our Terms & Conditions in a number of ways: 1) recruitment links, 2) vulgarities, 3) multiple threads on the same topic, etc.

Thank the Overlord!!!

Overlord and company did take notice.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
I'd like to follow up with a bit of opinion, that doesn't necessarily belong in the opening announcement post.

While I can appreciate the apparent long-term goals of the movement -- meaningful social change for the betterment of all -- I can't necessarily condone some of the more extreme methods, or some of the more recent commercial/consumer "targets." But still, that's all open for discussion.

However, I have a serious concern that the movement has been polluted in the same way the "Tea Party" has been polluted. Individuals with less than noble ideals are claiming association with the movement, diluting the original message, and causing significant confusion. And, even more recently, those with seemingly no ideals are just clinging to the moniker because it's currently "fashionable" for those who aspire to be subversive. I can't but think (and hope) that the originators of the movement are stepping back and shaking their heads in bewilderment.

I can see how this has happened. When Anonymous first started out, their 'denial of service' protests were rather innocent. Once Anonymous entered into the more extreme activism, the group's credibility started to become tainted. "Tea Party" was also a victim of such changes. It goes to show everyone that nothing cannot go without evolving into corruption.

Originally posted by Majic
My rule of thumb: "Anyone who claims to be Anonymous, isn't."

"Ghost in the Shell: The Laughing Man" is a great pop-culture reference to what has happened to the "Tea Party" and "Anonymous".

I undersand that you cant post links recruiting people on Above Top Secret and thats cool.

Besides most Anonymous loosely based groups need quality not quantity its not a members club like ats. The people posting the recruiting links are not Anonymous, neither is that website, this website or your email and ip lol.

Not Anonymous

A bunch of teens or young men, who discovered Anonymous in the last year or two with zero knowledge of how to keep themselfs Anonymous. lol

this annoys me because i was harassing sciencetologists in 2004 without a membership will i have to renew my membership or something lol

IF YOU WANT TO BE ANONYMOUS YOU ARE.

vpn's, proxies, dynamic ips Ring any bells kiddys

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
However, I have a serious concern that the movement has been polluted in the same way the "Tea Party" has been polluted.

Here is my opinion on your comment from a few days ago
reply to post by ModernAcademia

Yes dilution is a problem!

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Exactly, you saw what happened to the hippy movement and then later the gothic movement. Once something becomes mainstream and popular, it's core original founding members start to want to distance themselves from it as it begins to lose it's original purpose and meaning.

reply to post by NoRegretsEver


Yes, this is what I was thinking as well. It never even occurred to me that I would impose policy on a website in which I was not a stakeholder. And further, were I a stakeholder, I would feel it well within my rights to NOT permit solicitation of any program/product and refuse the right of any not to be served if they did not adhere to the values of the site. And I would do it without explanation to the users accept with a memo of amendment to the T & C.

Case in point, again with my failed feasibility study for the distribution of art films. Porn films were not accepted by the Board. Nothing against porn films, most of the Board privately enjoyed them thoroughly. They were just not appropriate for our site. We did not explain this and made no apologies.

I feel the same here as well. You are very kind to explain this to all 15,000 plus of us. However, it was not necessary and a simple memo to my inbox explaining your knew policy would been sufficient.

God Bless You All...I swear some of these folks have no idea how good they have it with ATS.
Peace, love and light to the Site Owners and Admin!

I don't follow anyone or group. I have thought about it in the past, but in the end I stay out of the framework of ANY type of group. I follow what I feel is right by living by example. I don't know enough about Anon or the top dawgs here to have full trust. I can only agree or disagree with what I think is right with my own values of what I think is best for myself and give ideas that I think would benefit all people.

Thats why I will post sometimes fearless cause I have nothing to hide and don't care who tracks or hacks me, good luck, and sorry that you wasted time.

So I sit and read and hold back alot of my responses. From where I sit ATS is good at filtering what should be on this site and I agree with why they fullfill their interests.

Who knows whats really going on with the group of A, If I had all the answers there would be no need to speculate. So with me when it comes to this group I will just read and leave it at that.

If someone wants me to know nothing, they can pm me like ATS did for this thread.

I remain skeptic, but I see where the skeptic OL is coming from. AboveTopSecret is an Idea as just as much as the Anons...


I believe ATS is afraid, Afraid that there picture perfect community is going to come crumbling down... And it has already begun IMO.


Food for thought:

ATS is an idea, an idea for profit.

Anon is an idea, an idea for freedom. world wide, not just in the USA.

TPTB are afraid, and if my sources are right we should all pray to god that a peaceful revolution does occur.


I know for one I'm on the side of freedom, I don't know about the rest of you guys just trying to chat it up.

Well done.

As Stan Lee sez, "'Nuff said."

Originally posted by ZeroReady
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

SpartanKingLeonidas, I wonder what your namesake would think of your idea of non-violent action when he opposed the army of Persia? What would the signers of our Declaration of Independence say to your recommendation of non-violence and remaining within the law when they broke every law in the book to form a new nation? Every single one of those men knew that if they lost the war they had started in defense of their rights they would be convicted of treason and hanged. How can laws which are unjust to begin with not be broken in the fight against such tyranny?

My namesake does not live in this day and age.

Back then and during the Battle of Thermopylae warriors fought toe to toe.

Leonidas would think the same of Anonymous as I do now that they are cowards.

Fighting with servers, hacking, and long distance attacks, as did Xerxes and the Persians.

On top of this Leonidas fought for his country, foregoing the corruption, sidestepping it legally.

He became a free-man, with his 300, and with 11,400 other Greeks, who fought to stop a hoard.

My original post stands as I said it because free men do not hide and fight illegally.

They learn to use those laws, and bypass the corruption, instead of flaunting those laws.

The laws are written to defend a country, whether you agree with them or not, they favor lawful action.

However, knowing those laws, as policy, procedure, and protocol, you can use them to fight too.

The terrorist group Anonymous steps into illegal action anytime it makes threats.

In my lifelong mission of being a conspiracy theorist many people mistake me as anti-Government.

This is a misnomer and wholly incorrect.

I am anti-corruption within Government, even if that walks hand in hand, at times it is the same.

A Government, take your pick of which one, is nothing more than a functionary unit, or organization.

It is the people within it who are to be held accountable and if those people will not acquiesce?

Then you force them to stand for your principles, through legal means, through non-violence.

Otherwise you make a God-damned stand and plant your feet firmly and steadfastly.

There are many, many more ways to fight corruption, then to become the very perversity you fight.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
From our perspective, behind the scenes, the ebb-and-flow of topical evolution on ATS can be fascinating at times, inspiring sometimes, and downright frustrating on occasion. This is one of those occasions.

Okay I guess since everyone else here seems to be kissing butt, so I guess I am gonna have to play the bad cop and ask some of the hard questions that no one is asking. Not that I don't agree with anything you have said because I too have been a little disappointed at times, but my question is if it is not your ebb and flow or 'ideal' then perhaps you could share with us what you would like to see more of and the direction you would prefer ATS to go into the future as?

First, before I get to the issue at hand, a little stroll back in history, a video we produced in September of 2007:
That's right. Before "Anonymous" exploded into the meme-filled psyche of the Internet, we at ATS embraced the same revolutionary ideas of the importance of a like-minded crowed of people. And the notion that a modern-day "Gunpowder Conspiracy" of Guy Fawkes is being reinvigorated by the Internet.

I never seen that video before but I wasn't impressed with it since I didn't walk away with a clear understanding of the direction you were trying to take me. IMHO

The frustrating ebb/flow of the day is the sudden influx of topics and comments that somehow propose we (ATS Staff) are censoring or somehow limiting discussion of the Internet movement known as "Anonymous." A minor amount of research clearly indicates no such restriction has happened, or is happening. What has happened, over the past few days, is the removal of posts or threads that reference "Anonymous," that have run afoul of our Terms & Conditions in a number of ways: 1) recruitment links, 2) vulgarities, 3) multiple threads on the same topic, etc.

I for one feel that ATS has taken censorship to certain extremes and censorship. Take the Marijuana subject that is legal medicinally. Most all those get deleted and it offends me because I know a lot of good outstanding citizens who smoke, I used to smoke and I still defend it whole heartedly. I think its a subject that more than deserves its time in the spotlight despite how you may personally feel on the subject. Also IMHO

As mentioned here, and repeatedly elsewhere, there is no desire to limit discussion of events and issues related to the movement. However, we all need to do so maturely and responsibly -- just like any of the other thousands of topics on ATS. If members still have some odd desire to see what happens when ATS is spammed with an inordinate number of new threads on the subject, we'll be forced to take some kind of action that will likely include limiting the discussion to a few existing threads. I don't want that, nor does our staff, since it would prevent important new developments from potentially rising to our site home.

If thats where you decided to take it then so be it, but that would be the death of ATS. Freedom of Speechh is why most people got started here to begin with along with varied subject matters.

With Respect to what you have done to this site and all the wonderful subject matter on it I have read and discussed I leave you with my two cents worth.

Originally posted by iLoGiCViZiOnS
I never seen that video before but I wasn't impressed with it since I didn't walk away with a clear understanding of the direction you were trying to take me. IMHO

It was a teaser video for a rather large "coming out" party in NYC with a few celebrities and lots of media... on November 5th, 2007.

Take the Marijuana subject that is legal medicinally.

That has been explained several times.

Freedom of Speechh is why most people got started here to begin with along with varied subject matters.

The potential for limiting discussion to existing threads is not censorship, but containment. This has happened before in several topical areas, including 9/11 conspiracies and UFOs for example.

An entity cannot be both a "movement" and a "forum for discussion" (at least not effectively) because these two aims take the entity corkscrewing off in different directions, so to speak. A forum for discussion draws strength from its neutrality. It sits impassively and welcomes all comers (within reason), casting a wide net. And ATS is remarkably, astonishingly successful at this, and moreover has been for years. It has achieved this by being strict on form (i.e., the terms and conditions) and open-minded on content.

Meanwhile, a movement draws strength from its pointedness, the specificity of its message, methods, and aims. A movement has a goal, and it manipulates polemics and psychology (as well as more physical factors) to achieve that goal. It is strict on form but perhaps often even stricter on content.

ATS can't be both, and I don't think it wants to be both. It's an academy and a library, not a barracks.

Your Move

reply to post by silent thunder

Think of it as a "movement" to provide a "forum for discussion".

While I am being somewhat jocose about it, that's actually a pretty accurate description, because the two concepts need not be mutually exclusive.

Making it possible for people to express themselves without being attacked is a cause I not only agree with, but actively support by being here.

Anyone else willing to join the "movement" is always welcome.