Anonymous a internet sociological phenomenon?

[suomynonA]

I don’t really know anything about sociology or marketing, but I think this is very interesting. I’ve read two recent articles about how the Anonymous movement against the Church of $cientology with a large number of people acting independently, completely without leaders, to accomplish a single goal is an unexplained social phenomena and a perfect example of viral marketing. I also had always held the assumption that any large group would eventually produce leaders, even if only unofficially, but Anonymous seems to go completely against that. One description I’ve heard is that it’s a real life Stand Alone Complex enabled by the development of more open internet based communication tools.

http://www.cydeweys.com/blog/2008/01/28/scientology-sac/
http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/080217-154255

Anonymous is also pretty excited about these observations with a lot of ‘we are awesome’ type comments.

http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3988
http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=3855

 

[Complexity]

I despise Scientology.

I'm not that impressed by 'Anonymous'.

They seem quite impressed with themselves. That's a turnoff.

 

[Tbone]

Anonymous having no leaders is both factual and not. Anonymous has no recognized elected (either by vote or popular opinion) leaders, but it is not without those who are highly respected (and occasionally listened to), its example-setters, or those who take charge of and organize these "IRL Raids." But these are local leaders, and leaders only in a paticular sense and context (ie. organizing the Scientololgy protests). Outside that context, they are the same as every other Anonymous.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Tinc

Tinc

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Tinc

T.i.n.c.

 

[suomynonA]

I despise Scientology.

I'm not that impressed by 'Anonymous'.

They seem quite impressed with themselves. That's a turnoff.

Like it or not, that is a major part of what Anonymous is. You have to remember this whole thing was born from *chan culture. It's an internet subculture where anonymity is the norm, even praised, but where trying to get attention by getting people to react in any way possible is most posters goal. It's a culture where people that create easily recognized identities (namefags) are despised as attention whores, and where moderators are absolutely never respected and often hated. It's a place where internet is serious business, goatse is no longer shocking, and where the end times are are going to be hailed by the battle between longcat and tacgnol. (If you don't get these reference, it's not important to begin with)

You may think it's a turnoff, but I love it. Anonymous is simultaneously working on a serious cause, and having a playful romp that has lead to some excellent lulz. And how exactly is a purely internet based group with absolutely no leadership holding the largest international protest against the Church of $cientology ever not impressive?

 

[suomynonA]

Anonymous having no leaders is both factual and not. Anonymous has no recognized elected (either by vote or popular opinion) leaders, but it is not without those who are highly respected (and occasionally listened to), its example-setters, or those who take charge of and organize these "IRL Raids." But these are local leaders, and leaders only in a paticular sense and context (ie. organizing the Scientololgy protests). Outside that context, they are the same as every other Anonymous.

There's a rather large thread about this on the Enturbulation forum.

http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=3577

Basically one person was complaining that anons were taking the no leaders ideal too far. The closest you will come to leaders are people that will volunteer to perform certain tasks. Anonymous has no leaders and really does not want leaders. Orders are not given and orders will often be ignored or thrown right back in the face of the person giving the order in the first place.

 

[vexed]

I think both groups (Anon & Scientology) need less attention.

Anonymous is also pretty excited about these observations with a lot of ‘we are awesome’ type comments.

Anything to boost the egos of those who sit in their mother's basement.

 

[Complexity]

Like it or not, that is a major part of what Anonymous is. You have to remember this whole thing was born from *chan culture. It's an internet subculture where anonymity is the norm, even praised, but where trying to get attention by getting people to react in any way possible is most posters goal. It's a culture where people that create easily recognized identities (namefags) are despised as attention whores, and where moderators are absolutely never respected and often hated. It's a place where internet is serious business, goatse is no longer shocking, and where the end times are are going to be hailed by the battle between longcat and tacgnol. (If you don't get these reference, it's not important to begin with)

You may think it's a turnoff, but I love it. Anonymous is simultaneously working on a serious cause, and having a playful romp that has lead to some excellent lulz. And how exactly is a purely internet based group with absolutely no leadership holding the largest international protest against the Church of $cientology ever not impressive?

Well, I can't think of a single reason to pay attention to 'Anonymous' or to you.

Since your only interest seems to be spamming us regarding your little band of little boys, I'm placing you on Ignore.

 

[LawnOven]

Hmm, a loosely organized group where those that are deemed skilled at a particular task by a jury of their peers are then made, functionally, temporary leaders, is a brand new concept hailed in by the information age?

Err, I don't think so. I do think the chans and anon, could use a bit of learn'in in regards to anthropological theory however.

 

[mrbaracuda]

gtfo newfag.

[...]and where moderators are absolutely never respected and often hated.[...]

Yea. I hate them ever since I got banned once for cross-posting Japanese women in b and the animals/ nature forum on 4. The reason I got banned for was "Women are not animals / nature". I mean, come on 4chan. Are you serious?

 

[tkingdoll]

Of course Anon has leaders. People who work much harder to promote the group than anyone else.

I'd say the person who started this thread is either one of them, or wants us to think he is.

 

[suomynonA]

Anything to boost the egos of those who sit in their mother's basement.

Ad hominem

Well, I can't think of a single reason to pay attention to 'Anonymous' or to you.

Since your only interest seems to be spamming us regarding your little band of little boys, I'm placing you on Ignore.

And ignoring me is completely okay with me.
Everyone should have the choice to say or listen to what they want. Of course since you're ignoring me this statement is mostly pointless.

I do wonder though, since when does two threads count as spamming?

Hmm, a loosely organized group where those that are deemed skilled at a particular task by a jury of their peers are then made, functionally, temporary leaders, is a brand new concept hailed in by the information age?

Err, I don't think so. I do think the chans and anon, could use a bit of learn'in in regards to anthropological theory however.

Well like I said in the first post, I don't really know anything about this sort of thing. Most anons obviously aren't going to know much about it. I understand that such structures with only extremely temporary roles of responsibility can happen in small groups, but has there ever been an example for a group that numbers in the thousands?

gtfo newfag.

Never going to give you up!

Of course Anon has leaders. People who work much harder to promote the group than anyone else.

I'd say the person who started this thread is either one of them, or wants us to think he is.

Maybe what I mean by leaders is different. I mean no one gives orders or takes orders, allowing everyone to act completely of their own will.

Obviously there are going to be people more involved. I'm really not one of them, not even close. I have enough stuff keeping me busy in the real world. I haven't done much to make or distribute propaganda material, and I haven't done anything to coordinate with other anons in my area.

 

[Reality Believer]

Tell me how Anonymous is different than any other masked hate group? They threaten and organize demonstrations against people who they don't like, supposedly under the guise of doing society a "favor".

I don't think many people like Scientology, but they have a constitutional right to practice their "religion" and their members have a right to be stupid.

Play back any of the messages recently issued by Anonymous and substitute the word "Scientologists" with "blacks" , "Jews" or any other persecuted group. It isn't so funny anymore is it? They are just the internet version of the KKK.

 

[mrbaracuda]

Never gonna give you up indeed. I actually laughed so hard, heh.

 

[vexed]

Ad hominem

Well, an ad hominem argument is any that attempts to counter anothers claims or conclusions by attacking the person, rather than addressing the argument itself.

Did I attempt to counter another's claim or conclusion? NO, because you haven't made any real claims, just a lot of nuthuggery.

I made a personal observation based on Anon 'members' that I have encountered. If that bothers you then change.

 

[vexed]

Tell me how Anonymous is different than any other masked hate group? They threaten and organize demonstrations against people who they don't like, supposedly under the guise of doing society a "favor".

I don't think many people like Scientology, but they have a constitutional right to practice their "religion" and their members have a right to be stupid.

Play back any of the messages recently issued by Anonymous and substitute the word "Scientologists" with "blacks" , "Jews" or any other persecuted group. It isn't so funny anymore is it? They are just the internet version of the KKK.

Agreed, and an excellent point.

 

[Moochie]

Like it or not, that is a major part of what Anonymous is. You have to remember this whole thing was born from *chan culture. It's an internet subculture where anonymity is the norm, even praised, but where trying to get attention by getting people to react in any way possible is most posters goal. It's a culture where people that create easily recognized identities (namefags) are despised as attention whores, and where moderators are absolutely never respected and often hated. It's a place where internet is serious business, goatse is no longer shocking, and where the end times are are going to be hailed by the battle between longcat and tacgnol. (If you don't get these reference, it's not important to begin with)

You may think it's a turnoff, but I love it. Anonymous is simultaneously working on a serious cause, and having a playful romp that has lead to some excellent lulz. And how exactly is a purely internet based group with absolutely no leadership holding the largest international protest against the Church of $cientology ever not impressive?

Unfortunately, as with most matters that capture these people's attention span, next week it'll be dropped me bloody milk. Hon -- hon? Can you iron my lulz?

M.

 

[Big Les]

Thing is, much as a lot of people here seem to dislike the group, it really does seem to be changing. You wouldn't believe the agonising going on on enturbulation.org over what tactics are appropriate, whether it's OK to attack the beliefs of Scientology etc etc.

The irresponsible law-breaking "neckbeard" nihilists are very much in a minority, and being shouted down on a regular basis.

I actually think (and hope) that most, if not all, of the "unfortunate" members have already given up interest. What's left is a hard core of about 6000 Anonymous members who are taking the campaign very seriously, bolstered by a lot of passive critics like myself, and a lot of experienced activists too, who have decided to throw their lot in as far as real life pickets and criticism of their ethics, practices and pseudoscientific nonsenses go.

Yes, there is still enjoyment taken from working against the church - unsurprisingly when you see what they've been responsible for. Yes, there is still a lot of internet silliness involved. But this shows no sign of slowing down as yet.

I really don't understand the accusation of "hate group" and the comparison with the KKK. For one thing following Scientology is a choice, albeit one heavily influenced by the church themselves, and not a state of being. It's a choice that brings with it partial responsibility for the crimes and regrettable activities of the group, and the negative effects of hawking pseudoscience in place of real medical treatments. This is more than deserving of any of the more traditional "South Park" style mocking tactics in my opinion, and yet Anonymous is striving very hard to move away from this, recognising that it can be seen as attacking freedom of belief.

Instead they are going after their practices. Currently the focus is upon their tax exemptions and their policy of disconnecting members from loved ones. Only time will tell how successful all this is, but at the very least there will be a larger number of responsible critics of Scientology left in its wake. If you know the first thing about this cult, that can only be a good thing.

 

[suomynonA]

Tell me how Anonymous is different than any other masked hate group? They threaten and organize demonstrations against people who they don't like, supposedly under the guise of doing society a "favor".

I don't think many people like Scientology, but they have a constitutional right to practice their "religion" and their members have a right to be stupid.

Play back any of the messages recently issued by Anonymous and substitute the word "Scientologists" with "blacks" , "Jews" or any other persecuted group. It isn't so funny anymore is it? They are just the internet version of the KKK.

Because Anonymous isn't attacking Scientology the religion, but is criticizing the Church of $cientology. There is a difference between what people believe and practice, and the organizations that present themselves as authorities of that religion. Anonymous doesn't have any problem with people believing in Xenu, thetans, or OT superman powers, even if they do come across as silly to most people.

The emphasis is on their church. Now there's nothing wrong with having a church, but the current one is corrupt. They continue to practice fair game, hide their beliefs from people that don't pay them thousands of dollars and spend years in the church, make people disconnect from their families, employ slave labor through the Rehibilitation Project Force. Then there's always Operation Snow White, Operation Freakout, and the mysterious death of Lisa McPherson.

There are no problems with religion. One of the slogans popular with the anons involved with the protests is "Beliefs are free, $cientology isn't". In fact anons are very supportive of Free Zoners. There is no religious hate here, only a movement to bring attention to a corrupt church.

Well, an ad hominem argument is any that attempts to counter anothers claims or conclusions by attacking the person, rather than addressing the argument itself.

Did I attempt to counter another's claim or conclusion? NO, because you haven't made any real claims, just a lot of nuthuggery.

I made a personal observation based on Anon 'members' that I have encountered. If that bothers you then change.

If I really misused ad hominen, then my bad. I'll try to do better in the future. But, you did use an inaccurate stereotype. Then you claim it's an observation, which it isn't.

Unfortunately, as with most matters that capture these people's attention span, next week it'll be dropped me bloody milk. Hon -- hon? Can you iron my lulz?

M.

This has already been going strong for over a month now. There's a protest planned for March 15th. Some people are already discussing protests for April. This is not a case of /b/tards hacking Myspace pages and making prank phone calls. Many people who have never even been on the chans before have joined under this.