Poll: How do you feel about Anonymous?

[BetterSummer]

I have an opinion here.

Anonymous is pretty much the 2nd best thing to happen to the internet, but too many people are complete idiots and abuse that label. The hack on PSN got me thinking and saying,

"Hey! This is the sort of hacking that is evil and mean and actually ruins a normal person's life. The fact it's on a network that funnels people into buying games and DLC and anti-piracy is actually a big point. Too many companies try to control the financial flow of money from their users, and that's plainly abusive to those users. Being anonymous is a cornerstone of the internet, so, uh, why not try to show people through the chaos of the PSN hack that they need to take control of their own financial freedom and stop letting companies like Sony guide them by the nose through the possibilities of the internet?"

I think they do good things, but other bits and projects are just flat out misguided and easily misread. Hacktivism is the best thing to happen to the internet.

 

[Kolby Jack]

They are the online equivalent to schoolyard punks playing pranks on the grumpy old teacher they don't like. Annoying, but harmless. Nothing they have done or ever will do will accomplish much of anything in the long run.

 

[tomtom94]

Agree with most of their actions, maybe less so with their methods.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

They are the online equivalent to schoolyard punks playing pranks on the grumpy old teacher they don't like. Annoying, but harmless. Nothing they have done or ever will do will accomplish much of anything in the long run.

Yeah that's pretty much my feeling about them, and that analogy is about right. With a dash of attention whoring for good measure.

OT: I ignore them. I don't think they are the heroes some people make them out to be, and I don't think they're assholes either, just annoying. I do think what some of the stuff they do is really dumb and a dick move though.

 

[Mumonk]

I like them, and people say, "but they do this bad thing and that bad thing.", well I say, at least they do SOME good things in the name of freedom. Which is more than what most people calling them bad are doing.

 

[Jegsimmons]

i agree with about 60% of what they do. i dont agree with their stand on wikileaks and some methods of what they do.

 

[JochemDude]

Their anarchists unless something bugs them they're not a threat to anyone. I agree with their ideals (mostly) and their methods are to me acceptable.

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

I think th

I picture Lulzsec to be basically the Internet's Joker with the whole chaotic stance they take (like attacking the FBI and Nintendo for no reason at all), and AnonOps lately has been more like Batman.

My view exactly.

Can't wait till the two dish it out.

 

[babinro]

I don't mind that they've chosen to protest against groups for various reasons. But I completely disagree with the way they are protesting. These are clearly a group of criminals who are trying to handle mature matters in a childish way.

Perhaps I'll be proven wrong though should they ever create a significant positive change wherein legal means of protests by a clear majority of people have always failed.

 

[Cipher1]

Attention seekers.


And to avoid moderator wrath for low content the reason why I have this view is that to me breaking the law to achieve a point is still breaking the law regardless of how grand or more often petty your ideals are.

 

[Chase Yojimbo]

I agree whole heartedly with their Ideals. Their work in Africa I respect, and their insults of Scientology and Ignoration of the Westboro Church I still laugh at. They are not all sunshine and rainbows, I understand this, but they will play a part in the future to come. People see them as nothing but criminals, but are you looking at them through your eyes, or through anothers?

 

[SoranMBane]

None of those options. I don't like or hate them, but it's more that they're completely amoral than it is me being indifferent. They seem to embody a lot of the best and worst aspects of internet culture, and for every good thing they do, they'll have something else about them that brings them down to the level of immature little fuckwits. They do seem to have a certain knack for actually getting shit done or at least managing to ruffle a lot of feathers as they go along, though, which makes them pretty interesting.

 

[Vonnis]

I don't care about them. The group that has been calling itself Anonymous for the past few years doesn't seem to have anything to do with the Anonymous I know, from way before that scientology bullshit. Lulzsec actually seems to be closer to that (no morals or ideals whatsoever, just doing shit because they can with no thought for how others view their actions). I liked the old Anonymous a lot better.

 

[Tiger Sora]

So long as the ISP's can still give me internet and xbox-live is running. I say let the freedom roll and the days of wild abandon continue.

 

[EternalFacepalm]

I agree to most of their actions, and I especially like their protests against Scientology. That was amazingly done.

 

[FalloutJack]

Mostly, I don't actually care. They had a thing going where they were apparently trying to be crazy idealists with extreme methodology. Compared to those idiot cowboys of now, they're actually kind of decent. However, I never really got too much into their shtick, ya know?

 

[Chase Yojimbo]

Douchebags.


And to avoid moderator wrath the reason for view is that to me breaking the law to achieve a point is still breaking the law regardless of how grand or more often petty your ideals are.

Those who don't follow the rules are traitors. Those who don't follow their ideals are not even human.

many people in history have broken the law so that they may bring the light of their ideals to the world and its people. The founding fathers of the US bore arms against the British so that they may have independance. They broke the law so that they could have freedom from the English.

Gandhi on many accounts broke the law because he spoke out when the British didn't want him to, and he was imprisoned numerous times. However he fought the British with Non-Violence, and it was merely the British who were fighting themselves. Gandhi finally won the fight and India/Pakistan won its independance.

When you say that we can't fight for our ideals we may as well lay down, and die face down in the dirt, and allow everyone to walk all over us like we are trash. Ideals are what got us here to begin with, and most of those ideals involved breaking the law. What Anon does, sure it may not be agreeable to most, but that is because it is an Ideal, and no one agrees with it until it finally comes to light.

I don't care if you agree with Anon or not, but don't you fucking dare say that we can't fight for our ideals if it means going against the law.

 

[Sansha]

They're effectively terrorists - performing illegal acts for what they feel is a good cause. They don't do it for their own gain - they profit nothing and receive no notoriety for their actions - and overall do not wish us, the common man, harm.

There are a select few who do, but they're a minority without the resources and backup from Anonymous as a whole to act on it. And mostly they'd be too scared to.

I honestly hope they grow, in influence and performance, and if they really posed a genuine threat to the safety and well-being of others, they'd get taken down without much effort.

 

[Wintermoot]

they are fighting for a good cause and assuming they weren't involved with the PSN downage they have been right this whole time.