Topics about "Anonymous" on ATS

page: 9
77
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 16 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frater210
reply to post by AnonYmous81
 


Hi, AnonYmous81




This has been subverted to become what it is today: the force for social change and freedom for all.

Sometimes soldiers do bad things. Even Anons make mistakes.


I hope you guys realize that you are beginning to sound like Hiltler's Brown Shirts and it doesn't help that you and yours seem partial to uniforms.


Oh Boy! Ad Hominem attacks comparing someone we disagree with to Nazis! How constructive, productive and accurate. You know who else compared everyone they disagreed with to the Nazis? Hitler!

You now who else is 'partial to uniforms'? Basebal players! Baseball players are essentially gassing the jews, obviously.
edit on 16-7-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 16 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
WE THE PEOPLE...



When the first link of the chain is forged, the first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably. As wisdom and warning, the first time any man’s freedom is trodden-on, we’re all damaged.

You’d think we’ve come so far, torture of heretics, burning of witches, in all ancient history. Then, if we even blink an eye, suddenly it threatens to start all-over again; spreading fear in the name of righteousness.

- Jean Luc Picard

edit on 16-7-2011 by trekwebmaster because: Typographical Error Fixed...



posted on Jul, 17 2011 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic


Originally posted by The Revenant
3) Do NOT attempt to pigeon-hole or assess Anonymous. This is a warning ScepticOverlord, for the communities benefit - if you attempt to classify, define or delimit Anonymous in any way, you will inevitably raise the ire of a part of the Anon.

This is precisely the sort of puerile puffery that discredits whatever shards of credibility might remain under the tattered, ephemeral banner of "Anonymous."

Threats and intimidation are the domain of thugs, posers and hangers-on, and have no place on ATS. As members, we will say what we will say, and no amount of ominous innuendo will change that.

All this shadow puppetry in the supposed name of disparate, temporary ad hoc groups is meaningless, carries the same spooky overtones as a group of children crowded around a Ouija board by flashlight trying to give each other the creeps, and is no more convincing.

No one can speak for Anonymous, because that very act exposes the fraud of doing so. Yet you make claims on "their" behalf, presuming to predict what "they" will do and dictate what can or cannot be said about them/it/whatever. The self-contradiction of doing this disproves itself, and is emblematic of the bizarre blend of irrationality and cognitive dissonance surrounding the endless conflicting claims of what "Anonymous" is.


Can I have an apology for this please?

I think you've totally misunderstood what I was saying. This is typical for you Majic, in that you naturally assume I'm trying to speak for Anonymous, that I'm issuing a threat, or that I'm trying to bully. I am not, have not, and will not do any of the above. I was warning against the action of trying to officially 'classify' Anon here on ATS, as word would get out, and some elements of Anon would inevitably cause a problem because of this. I value the community, and don't want to see it targeted because of a misguided attempt at pigeon-holing.

I really think you should use the 'non-moderator' post tool a bit more....

The Revenant.



posted on Jul, 17 2011 @ 08:09 AM
link   
When Words Fail


Originally posted by The Revenant
Can I have an apology for this please?

No. There is nothing to apologize for.


Originally posted by The Revenant
I think you've totally misunderstood what I was saying.

I think you said exactly what you said. No more, no less. Trying to characterize it as something other than that is equivocal and unconvincing.

For anyone who missed it, here's the post. It doesn't (and shouldn't) require abstruse interpretation, even though you now appear to be backpedaling from your own statements.

If you were not speaking on your behalf, then what I said does not apply to you, and it wouldn't be necessary to take offense. However, that also means you were making statements you are not qualified to make on behalf of Anonymous which, though possibly a different brand of puffery, is still puffery.

You spoke with authority about Anonymous, going so far as to admonish others for "pretending" to know what it is, that they should not "attempt to classify, define or delimit Anonymous in any way". In the same post, you went on to do precisely that, and spoke with assumed authority on behalf of your own concept of what "Anonymous" is, to the exclusion of any other. It was in this context that you issued your warning, and I really don't think I can be blamed for reading your words as written.

I will concede that I may not understand what you're saying, but that would be due to a notable presence of contradictions in your post, not a tendency on my part to "naturally assume" or fail to understand the language.

As for what is "typical" of me, I typically expect those who believe what they say to stand by their words, those who do not to quibble, and those who know they are flat out wrong to resort to ad hominem.

If you presume to talk big about Anonymous, particularly in a manner that you admonish others to avoid, you can expect candid criticism of that. If you lack the capacity or moral courage to face such criticism, I suggest adopting a more temperate and considered approach, rather than talking smack and then pointing fingers at those who take your words at face value.

Please don't get me wrong. If what you said is not what you meant to say, I can understand that and certainly won't hold that against you. We're only human. But please don't try to palm off your own errors on me, because I'm clearly not going to play that game.

Misunderstood though you may think yourself to be, your greatest enemies are not myself or anyone else here, but your own words.



posted on Jul, 18 2011 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heyyo_yoyo
Anonymous is a very touchy subject, ESPECIALLY to America. ATS is showing their ungloved hands here, and should be commended for their unbaised continuance to uphold Freedom of Speech!

I applaud ATS, and its staff and membership in continuing Constitutionally sound practices!


Freedom of what ?



posted on Jul, 18 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
When Words Fail

If you were not speaking on your behalf, then what I said does not apply to you, and it wouldn't be necessary to take offense. However, that also means you were making statements you are not qualified to make on behalf of Anonymous which, though possibly a different brand of puffery, is still puffery.


So anyone that disagrees with your opinion is guilty of puffery then? Anon is a dispassionate thing, about which I was trying to discuss dispassionately. You failed to keep perspective when you started discussing me and not the topic. For a super moderator to do that, and in public, does indeed make me 'lost for words'. Again, I humbly ask for an apology, so that we can get back to the subject at hand - I refuse to be bullied by you just because of a 'badge' you wear.


Originally posted by Majic
You spoke with authority about Anonymous, going so far as to admonish others for "pretending" to know what it is, that they should not "attempt to classify, define or delimit Anonymous in any way". In the same post, you went on to do precisely that, and spoke with assumed authority on behalf of your own concept of what "Anonymous" is, to the exclusion of any other. It was in this context that you issued your warning, and I really don't think I can be blamed for reading your words as written.


I disagree. To put it bluntly, I defined the lack of definition. Not an easy subject - I may have made errors, and I'm big enough to admit that if they're pointed out constructively. But in this instance you felt it your civic duty to belittle and bully a member. Normally, a moderator would take the conversation away from public, but not you - you insist on trying to bully and belittle people in public. I do NOT think that is appropriate behaviour.


Originally posted by Majic
I will concede that I may not understand what you're saying, but that would be due to a notable presence of contradictions in your post, not a tendency on my part to "naturally assume" or fail to understand the language.

As for what is "typical" of me, I typically expect those who believe what they say to stand by their words, those who do not to quibble, and those who know they are flat out wrong to resort to ad hominem.


If you don't understand, seek out more knowledge - obtain the complete picture before you judge. Don't just kick back and fire your 'Uber Moderator' artillery from a distance. Also, before this post, please quote my ad hominem attack against you. Again, I invite you to discuss this privately, then we can move on - I do not submit to public belittlement or bullying.


Originally posted by Majic
If you presume to talk big about Anonymous, particularly in a manner that you admonish others to avoid, you can expect candid criticism of that. If you lack the capacity or moral courage to face such criticism, I suggest adopting a more temperate and considered approach, rather than talking smack and then pointing fingers at those who take your words at face value.


Your first point may carry some weight in that I definitely expect criticism - but of the points I make, not me personally. You called me a bully and accused me of making threats. This is where the apology is required, these accusations were totally unfounded and unfair. And.... "talking smack?" What on earth is that?


Originally posted by Majic
Please don't get me wrong. If what you said is not what you meant to say, I can understand that and certainly won't hold that against you. We're only human. But please don't try to palm off your own errors on me, because I'm clearly not going to play that game.


Again with the belittling? Seriously... please try and discuss this (the topic) in a civil manner. I shouldn't have to say this.


Originally posted by Majic
Misunderstood though you may think yourself to be, your greatest enemies are not myself or anyone else here, but your own words.


Misunderstood yes. I am 100% convinced I am my own greatest enemy. Anyone else that says otherwise about themselves is generally fibbing. Please don't attempt to character assassinate me, for you to try and do so is just unbelievable. You're letting ATS down Majic. PLEASE can we resolve our little spat privately?

Or shall we say water under the bridge and be smiley again?


The Revenant.



posted on Jul, 18 2011 @ 02:59 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 19 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   
A Bridge Over Troubled Waters


Originally posted by The Revenant
Or shall we say water under the bridge and be smiley again?

Sure, let's go with that. And I'm not being sarcastic.


While I think your fixation on my being a mod is misplaced (I'm a member first, and I hope it's obvious that I'm speaking as one in this case), I can agree that there are much better ways for me to make my point, and without my own brand of puffery. I don't offer an apology for expressing my views, but I do offer an apology for expressing them in such a snarky manner. That's not just unpleasant for you, but for anyone reading, and for that I'm truly sorry.


As for the rest, I can appreciate putting me on the defensive as a debate tactic, but it really doesn't bring us any closer to an understanding on the topic. Without going point by point in classic USENET cascade fashion, I think it would be best to focus on our points of contention.

Getting first to the "threat" issue, I can see where that could be construed as not a warning of action on your part, but on the part of others. You may find this surprising, but that's exactly how I took it, and it was to that vague sort of threat I was speaking. I really do think it's overblown, and concerns on that score are unnecessary.

That's because ATS, just by virtue of what it is and stands for, already has a big bullseye painted on it. We're not just the object of threats, but active attempts to shut us down, day in and day out, 365 days a year. Whether port scans, injection hacks, Denial-Of-Service attacks, account privilege tweaking, stalking the admins (both on or off the Internet) or just good old-fashioned doorknob jiggling, ATS is under constant assault. While I don't think we need to invite more trouble, there's already no shortage of it, and anyone truly interested in bringing ATS down should take a number, because the line is long.

Unless I'm missing something, I think we're probably on the same page about the whole "threat" issue, and can consider that settled.

As for the rest, a nicer way to broach that is to say that I don't understand the apparent contradiction between saying Anonymous can't be defined, telling people they don't know what it is, and then defining it.

Just not seeing that. :shk:

But at this point, it probably doesn't matter, and can be considered something we can agree to disagree on. God knows there's no shortage of that around here, and just as well.

So if you're with me on this genuinely being water under the bridge, I'm totally okay with that.

Honest.



posted on Jul, 19 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


Awesome. I'm up for that. Prepare to have your ass handed to you some other time though - and this time we can play fair.


The Revenant.



posted on Jul, 21 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
SAy goodbye to thje Internet. Thanks Anonymous!



posted on Jul, 21 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   

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)


isnt it funny how Anon can be as corrupt as the governments it so despises?



posted on Jul, 23 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
As for the rest, a nicer way to broach that is to say that I don't understand the apparent contradiction between saying Anonymous can't be defined, telling people they don't know what it is, and then defining it.


I don't understand that either (not referring to the other poster, but in general). It's defined, as not being defineable, which is a definition in itself. Kinda like Seinfeld, "a show about nothing". It's about something, which is nothing?

Reminds me of a quote from one of the greatest comedians of all time...Louis CK


Well because some things ARE and some things ARE NOT.

Why?

Well because things that ARE NOT, can't BE.

Why?

Because then NOTHING WOULDN'T BE, you cant have ****ing nothing ISN'T, everything IS.

Why?

Because if NOTHING WASN'T there'd be all kinds of **** like we dont-like giant ants with top hats dancing around - there's no room for all that ****.

Why?

Oh **** you, eat your french fries you little ****. Goddammit.




posted on Jul, 24 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   
I think we should have a cyber-security or cyberspace forum, all the threads on internet activism, hacking and cyber-warfare get posted in random forums. I think if we had somewhere specifically for this topic it would help stop identical threads you know?



posted on Jul, 24 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Anonymous messed with a family's member's business when they messed with Paypal, so as a matter of principle, I can never support them or forgive them for what they have done.

They say they stand for freedom, but it's clear from recent actions that some members of Anonymous want the opposite. They say one thing and turn around and do another.



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   
hey skeptic thank you for taking the stand and the measures to keep it real and keeping this site at its roots. Ive only been a memner for a short time but this has become my favorite site thank you for assisting us in our quests to deny ignorance, keep up the good work and thanks agian



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   
I 100% support anon but I choose not to discuss anon at all, especially here where everyone thinks anon is a governemnt operation. Anon has been around for quite some time it's just that not too many people knew about it and even less people understand it....even still many here on ATS the internets own hub of intellects and in my opinon some of the greatest minds I've ever dealt with, people still dont understand anon.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 08:52 PM
link   
In a free democratic society,truth is paramount.

If truth can be manipulated or controlled or influenced then democracy failed by proxy.

If a moderatoer censors a thread where someone is trying to tell their truth then democracy has failed,I have had threads moderated here on ats by in my opinion biased moderation.

You choose to moderate and you choose to GOVERN,we have moderators here on ATS right?

Who polices or watches the government here on ATS?

No one does,thats who,the moderators moderate themselves independantly of the creators and contributors to the threads here,they SELF POLICE.

We all know what happens when a government self-polices,dont we?


I appreciate the effort in trying to tell me that there has been no effort to moderate the amount of attention given to threads containing issues related to Anonymous,since whatever date the ats government has provided.

But that is a load of crap,I HAVE HAD THREADS INDEPENDANTLY DIRECTED BY MODERATORS through their actions intended or not,and I have had threads manipulated by more than one poster independant of myself manipulating simple situational dynamics and thereby useing the moderators predicted actions as a censoring tool.

I have seen terrific informational and vibrant threads absolutely hammered by intentional disinformation and moderator manipulation.

Until we have a random pick of moderators available from our entire ATS membership,available at all times and randomly chosen as needed ,this site will continue to be run by a self-governing group of individuals acting under a so called fair power structure.

Absolute anonymity is what is required here on ATS---AND WE DONT HAVE IT HERE ANYWHERE.

We need a forum where there is no moderation,where there are no posts removed ,where everyone who chooses to participate understands that whatever they post WILL STAND WHERE THEY POST IT.

Obviously an adult forum where anyone entering is over 18 or the accepted age of consent or majority.

Why is Anonymous the only place we can find unfettered uncensored truth???

Isnt that what ATS is supposed to be?

I am not trying to have a discourse on the rules and regulations agreed upon when we join ATS either,I am simply speaking from experience.

In fact there is a hidden danger in allowing this dynamic to occur,the danger is that what happens when more people believe in Anonymous than believe in the supposed unbiased anonymous freedom to share information here on this site?????

Anonymous will have more control than the people,that is the danger,and who polices anonymous??

Site administrators need to recognise this issue soon and provide a forum especially for threads that wish NO MODERATION.

People will go to where they BELIEVE they are treated fairly and honestly,what has anonymous EVER said or done that someone right here on ATS hasnt already said or suggested be done??


We are all Anonymous and either the administration we allow to police us here on ATS will see this problem and fix it or we will slowly find ourselves going to Anonymouses site to share our ideas and information.

Show us what you are telling us,I dont believe the police telling me the police are doing a great job,do you???



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by one4all
 


Your hero group just showed you how to use the internet to censor. They are now 100% for censorship. Not only that, they want their collective (which inludes you) to come together and do the censoring.

Evidenced in this thread announcing their new project,
Undeniable proof

So I guess the message I wish to convey to you after that really long post you made is,
get off your high horse.


Have a nice day



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


Stop whining about long or short or pretty or ugly posts already it is annoying,yes to the real things you posted,NO to the whining about the long post,.

Please already,this combined with the crying about spelling and grammer that frequently disrupt threads are real party poopers,so please keep these little quirks to yourself and keep posting your perspectives,not your petty complaints.

You-all have a nice day as well.
edit on 27-7-2011 by one4all because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by one4all
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


,yes to the real things you posted,NO to the whining about the long post,.



You-all have a nice day as well.
edit on 27-7-2011 by one4all because: (no reason given)


Point taken, but if I didn't include the comment, you would have just been left red faced so think of it as a common curtousy to leave you with an avenue to vent back with.





new topics
top topics
 
77
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join