Phantom1
[css-div="font-size: 12px; font-variant: small-cap
- 1,182
- Posts
- 12
- Years
- Age 33
- Minnesota
- Seen Sep 19, 2017
Just because you don't agree with how the 'group' has changed, doesn't mean you or I were ever wrong. We are both right, but in different ways only because we have differing opinions on the interpretation of the same idea.
I agree, there are those who use the cover of Anon to bloat their egos, those people, they are attention seeking.
Thing is you said I wasn't Anon, thing is I never claimed to be. I haven't used my real name in any sort of Anon movement. My alias, which I use wherever I go, 'Phantom', has become somewhat of an identity for me.
I support the ideal, but for all you know, anyone, and I mean ANYONE, could be using the name to forward their own ideals and opinions, in order to speak freely. For all you know, somewhere else I could be Anon, the person who posted above you could be, or the person posting after.
That's the point.
I agree. It's beautiful, to be able to say what you believe without worrying about retaliation. Though your name doesn't have to be 'Anonymous', 'Anon', nor any other variant, to express this. The internet is its own world, where it and the 'real world' simply overlap like a diagram. On the internet you can be anyone, especially if you know how to cover your tracks. Whether you call yourself Anonymous or Bilbo Baggins.
Though I never claimed to be working in Anon's name, ever. Do not assume.
On how Anonymous has changed, where you say it's a negative, I say it's a postitive. Free expression is still at the heart of the idea, it's still there, but now people are more active and not only saying, but doing. Do some go too far? Maybe, definitely.
Does it need to be done?
It wouldn't have been done if there wasn't an outcry already for something to be done. By now we've all seen the videos. The coined term 'citizens of the internet' is being used more and more frequently. They aren't just making decisions on their own, they are responding to the general reaction the 'citizens of the internet' have had.
Many might be responsible and not realize it. Somewhere there is a Anon browsing the internet. They go to forums, read tumblr, twitter, and blogs. They see the general outcry that people had, say with the WBC's actions. After seeing so many people complain, become emotional, and cry for justice to be done, this Anon acted in their names, without the need for thanks, without the need for credit to be given, save for to spread the message. They listened where the gov't fell deaf.
And though I may not agree with all the of these Anon that stand up and do rather than say, I still agree and believe in their intent.
I agree, there are those who use the cover of Anon to bloat their egos, those people, they are attention seeking.
Thing is you said I wasn't Anon, thing is I never claimed to be. I haven't used my real name in any sort of Anon movement. My alias, which I use wherever I go, 'Phantom', has become somewhat of an identity for me.
I support the ideal, but for all you know, anyone, and I mean ANYONE, could be using the name to forward their own ideals and opinions, in order to speak freely. For all you know, somewhere else I could be Anon, the person who posted above you could be, or the person posting after.
That's the point.
I agree. It's beautiful, to be able to say what you believe without worrying about retaliation. Though your name doesn't have to be 'Anonymous', 'Anon', nor any other variant, to express this. The internet is its own world, where it and the 'real world' simply overlap like a diagram. On the internet you can be anyone, especially if you know how to cover your tracks. Whether you call yourself Anonymous or Bilbo Baggins.
Though I never claimed to be working in Anon's name, ever. Do not assume.
On how Anonymous has changed, where you say it's a negative, I say it's a postitive. Free expression is still at the heart of the idea, it's still there, but now people are more active and not only saying, but doing. Do some go too far? Maybe, definitely.
Does it need to be done?
It wouldn't have been done if there wasn't an outcry already for something to be done. By now we've all seen the videos. The coined term 'citizens of the internet' is being used more and more frequently. They aren't just making decisions on their own, they are responding to the general reaction the 'citizens of the internet' have had.
Many might be responsible and not realize it. Somewhere there is a Anon browsing the internet. They go to forums, read tumblr, twitter, and blogs. They see the general outcry that people had, say with the WBC's actions. After seeing so many people complain, become emotional, and cry for justice to be done, this Anon acted in their names, without the need for thanks, without the need for credit to be given, save for to spread the message. They listened where the gov't fell deaf.
And though I may not agree with all the of these Anon that stand up and do rather than say, I still agree and believe in their intent.