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.

.

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.

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.

Thanks for shedding some light on this blight Andrew. Its a very informative and thorough article. Congratulations!

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.

Lurk Moar