The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Who is Anonymous? > Comments

Who is Anonymous? : Comments

By Andrew Riddle, published 14/5/2010

The Anonymous culture is an increasingly significant part of the online world.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
IF Andrew Riddle is a second year Bachelor of Journalism student at the University of Wollongong then he should by now understand just how little of what done on internet is actually anonymous.

Perhaps his next article can explain how a nom de plume is not so anonymous.

.
Posted by polpak, Friday, 14 May 2010 11:25:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew, now that you've posted this, you might want to buy a dog, and perhaps some curtains. Maybe buy some dog curtains.

Good luck.
Posted by Bugsy, Friday, 14 May 2010 11:39:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A very interesting article Andrew, very interesting indeed.

Not for the reason you hoped it would, but by the way you present it.

It's interesting you bring up some odd rape-endorser message board to open up your argument.
You wouldn't be trying to do that to paint online anonymity in general in a similar brush by any chance?

Next please...

Just an 'insight' into how a 'subgroup' supposedly operates through the ignorant eyes of an observer- passed onto an ignorant audience.
Posted by King Hazza, Friday, 14 May 2010 12:15:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks for shedding some light on this blight Andrew. Its a very informative and thorough article. Congratulations!
Posted by Rae, Friday, 14 May 2010 12:16:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
King Hazza,

I'm not trying to discredit online anonymity in general; this piece was written for a newspaper audience who have only ever heard of Anonymous described as 'a group' or 'a network' in association with something or other. This makes them sound pretty much like some kind of terrorist group, when any actual familiarity indicates it's more of a culture. There's a big difference between the way people behave when they have post online with any sort of ongoing identity, and how they behave when each and every post is genuinely anonymous.

And if you've spent any time on the sites I'm talking about - 4chan's /b/ being the most notable - you'll see that Nina's story is not an outlier.
Posted by AndrewRiddle, Friday, 14 May 2010 12:40:31 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lurk Moar
Posted by anonymous9999, Friday, 14 May 2010 2:51:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Andrew,

An intersting article, but I must point out some errors. There is no such thing as Anonymous, it is a joke started on 4chan or EDramatica.

People post articles JUST TO ILLICIT A REACTION. They don't mean what they say, they just get amused by people responding (negatively OR positively) to a post. To ignore their behaviour is depriving them of 'oxygen'. So called 'trolls' will be laughing their heads of that your very article has been written.

'Trolls' are often ADHD people, will tiny attention spans who want to create 'drama'. Scientology protesting has become boring to many. One of the popular web forums where this is discussed (forums.whyweprotest.net) has become a hangout for the so-called 'moralfags'. They are moralfags as they see everything as black and white - there are no shades of grey.

For example, someone might enter a Scientology building to attempt to gather evidence of alleged fraud or wrongdoings with a hidden camera. So called moralfags would argue that this is deception and therefore abhorrent. Others may argue it's journalism. (that's just a very random example
Posted by Chris Hatfield, Friday, 14 May 2010 7:58:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Chris,
While Anonymous doesn't exist as a "group" or "network" as it is often described in the mainstream media, it certainly exists as a subculture. That is, there's a shared set of knowledge, expectations and beliefs that is quite distinct from mainstream society, with trolling being just a part of the bigger picture. Certainly there are many people who consider themselves a part of it and dedicate significant time to it - and what else defines a human social group?

The reductive idea of trolls as having ADHD is in itself evidence that they need more discussion and exploration. Trolling can be quite a complex way of gaming the rules of social behaviour, and I suspect many of the people involved are actually very high-functioning. (While, of course, very many of them are bored teenagers.) It's clear that many people who would consider themselves part of Anonymous are actually much smarter than many parts of the internet or society.

As for your definition of "moralfags", the term is generally used for anyone who applies morality to online behaviour.
Posted by AndrewRiddle, Friday, 14 May 2010 9:45:00 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hey Andrew, Anonymous is onto you now:

http://forums.whyweprotest.net/15-media/who-anonymous-66601/

Get popcorn, folks.
Posted by Nonyrama, Saturday, 15 May 2010 9:20:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Once upon a time our Newspapers had articles submitted by "Our Washington Correspondent" - aka The Pentagon.

I'm sure that there are various political interest groups that are mobilised to call radio talkback shows and post to various forums en-masse at various times. It's just another form of Viral Advertising.
Posted by wobbles, Saturday, 15 May 2010 10:11:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My apologies Andrew, missed the paraphrase of the other author (I'll see if I can re-edit the last bit).

To address the article;
In general, it seems the media, losing more people to the internet as the main source of information, is simply trying its very hardest to demonize it to keep its remaining (more easily susceptible) audiences away, in increasingly unorthodox and blatant ways knowing that barely any rational people are going to be reading it to take notice.

In short, online anonymity extends from ANY form of expression that would make enemies with some zealous nut who would get annoyed and key ones car if they knew who's to look for.
Come to think of it, newspapers, Current Affairs shows and the such often resort to invasive and arguably illegal methods to leak private details of people they don't like (that Camden lady in the Australian-flag hat being one, and the reporting of David Hicks' current address on a half-yearly basis being another).
In short, anonymous online posting is moreso something the media created itself in many ways, by setting standards of social stigma stiffling expression- and putting them in trouble by broadcasting their identity, address and workplace to angry stalkers.

The result- open and free mediums of unlimited expression- including 4chan which I am aware of- whose only limitations are stronger ideas expressed by equal others- which really is the only way people are going to evolve at this point in time.
Posted by King Hazza, Saturday, 15 May 2010 10:59:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew,
You should have written "partly strangle". To strangle means to kill by compression of the windpipe.
Posted by GlenWriter, Sunday, 16 May 2010 1:41:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The comments made to Nina Funnel were indicative of the Lowest Common Denominators - a feature of most societies but not the litmus test for anonymity.

The internet is a quicker fix for those who might have in the past sent hate mail through the post with those cut out newspaper letters that you read about in any good Agatha Christie novel.

Anonymity is vital on the web, there are nutters out there in the real world and in cyberspace. If you post an opinion online using your real name then it is a risk you take.
Posted by pelican, Sunday, 16 May 2010 2:23:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is a classic.

“white knighting”! haha where is CJ Morgan!

'Of course, anonymity makes it hard to draw the line between real and make-believe.'

And there we have the source of your problem. You're taking it all way too seriously. You see misogyny because you think people posting really believe what they're saying.

It's a self-perpetuating phenomena. People like yourself rallying about such things is the very reason such things exist. In fact, you NEED them more than they need you. With trolling nobody, and I mean NOBODY ever addresses the other participants; Those that seriously GET OFF on judgement, and self righteousness and painting people as misogynists. Trolls seriously validate your world view and are the very legs of your high horse.
Posted by Houellebecq, Monday, 17 May 2010 9:43:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Agree Pelican
"Anonymity is vital on the web, there are nutters out there in the real world and in cyberspace. If you post an opinion online using your real name then it is a risk you take."

Exactly- whats more is, anonyimity forces those who disagree to do something appropriate if they don't like it.

In the good ol' days, if someone said something that infuriated someone else, that someone else would have more likely thrown a brick through that person's window and ran away.
These days, that person has to either live with it or try to prove the person wrong.
Posted by King Hazza, Monday, 17 May 2010 10:44:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What you failed to mention is the most important and effective activities of Anonymous: to alert the masses to the dangers of scientology, to encourage people to speak up against the church's human rights violations and to help ex members be able to speak out without fear of 'fair game' retribution by the cult of scientology.

These have the end goal of the dismanteling of the church. A fine goal I support, having in the past been a long time member of Scientology who observed first hand the very crimes Anonymous protests against.

I love Anonymous. Many Scientologists have been freed of the chains enough to walk away from Scientology and the totalitarian mindset Scientology imbeds in it's members because of the efforts of Anonymous. Freedom of Speech is foreign to Scientologists until they get onto the internet and start reading. Anonymous paves the way for so many to look, listen and learn the truth. Yes, I love and am grateful to the Anonymous movement. 99% of the people participating are GOOD people, caring and many ex Scientologists are grateful to Anonymous because Anonymous helps make it possible to not be afraid of Scientology anymore! Scientology hates Anonymous. You can see their diehard members here, posting kudos to the author of this foolish article. The program scripts they use are quite predictable.

Remember: Anonymous is your neighbor, your teacher, your friend, your cousin, your retailer, your loved one.... the list is long. The reasons varied but the goal is dismanteling Scientology because it really must be done. I am Anonymous. You can be Anonymous, too. Visit Whyweprotest
Posted by JustCallMeMary, Wednesday, 19 May 2010 11:32:50 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy