[clug] Anonymous and Legion

[Scott Ferguson]

Alex directly emailed me his response to my post (and cc'd to the list). 
Being a little busy at the moment I failed to notice the cc until later. 
So here is a copy of my reply - complete with the original spelling errors.
I hope that the "web gone sour" thread will continue. Just wished to 
clarify a couple of misunderstandings without clogging that thread.

Alex Satrapa wrote:
 > On 16/02/2010, at 12:06 , Scott Ferguson wrote:
 >
 >
 >> Anonymous is somewhat composed of 14 year old script kiddies with a 
penchant for goatse (if you need to ask - you don't want to know). 
Anonymous for the most part is a group that communicates by chat 
(irc://irc.anonnet.org#projectfreeweb and others).
 >>
 >> ...
 >>
 >> So you have a bunch of "Fight Club fan" bois (as someone said - 
using there mum's broadband) with a hormones looking to justify their 
anger at being social marginalized (because they are obnoxious). And 
competing to see who can tell the biggest lies about their exploits. ie. 
"spokespeople" who speak for a group who have no leader.
 >>
 > ...
 >
 >> Anonymous has organised a "silent protest" for this coming Saturday 
(http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Operation_Titstorm_IRL#Canberra)- it 
would be good if some of those opposed to the plans for censorship were 
to show their faces their (meet)behind the National Library - in order 
to counter the 4chan stereotype, and help keep any socially challenged 
participants in check.
 >>
 >
 > Let me see if I've got this straight. Your claim is that "Anonymous" 
is a bunch of basement virgin /b/tards.
No. You don't have that straight. "somewhat composed of".
 > They claim to be organising a rally in Canberra (arse end of the 
universe, regardless what continent you live on). You then state that we 
should attend to keep the /b/tards in check.
 >
I stated that was one of the reasons to attend
 > So… if they're really /b/tard basement virgins, are we really 
expecting anyone to actually turn up in Canberra?
 >
Ok - that a sophism. But I get what you mean. I don't know if anyone 
will turn up. But I would hope that those who do turn up will not 
further discredit those opposed to government censorship of the internet.
 > And if *I* turn up to join the protest, doesn't that mean that I'm 
allying myself with a bunch of folks who have only just recently engaged 
in activity designed to interrupt the daily operation of Government?
No more than supporting - say decriminalization of cannabis makes you a 
supporter of cannabis consumption.
 > Can someone point out how I can possibly turn up to that protest 
without being tarred with the "faxes porn to ministers" brush?
 >
I was planning on carrying a sign to that effect.
 > Is this really just a case of /b/tards messin' wit' y'all?
 >
That line of thought, unfortunately, caused many to not speak out 
against McCarthy because although they were opposed to anti-communist 
witch-hunts, they didn't support communism. And ultimately that is what 
allowed McCarthyism to flourish.
 > Alex
 >
 >
 >
Again, I deplore the tactics used by "Anonymous". I wish to disassociate 
my opposition to censorship from theirs (sic) - but I can't see how that 
can be done by psychic means...
You are right to be cynical. For every legitimate protest their will 
always be a Rent-A-Mob.