Donglegate: Why aren’t we questioning what Anonymous did?

So, lets start with the factual corrections.

The jokes were most certainly sexual by everyone's account. Whether they were sexist is a topic on which there is disagreement.

Anonymous is a mantle, not a collective of any meaningful distinction. I could be Anonymous in one context and have no presence awareness of or agreement with other so called members of Anonymous or their actions.

The Anons who physically travelled to rally for the victim in the Steubenville rape case are almost certainly not the same folks trying to ruin Adria Richard's life.

What remains bizarre in all of these discussions is the lack of agency with which the companies are described. Play haven and Sendgrid made these decisions, not Adria not the jokers, not you, and definitely not Anonymous.

"Like many, I have supported lots of Anonymous’s initiatives, as they’ve taken on something of a Digital Robin Hood-esque persona." -- I love how the freaking author couldn't even take personal responsibility for passive support, had to lead off with "Like many, "

Anonymous is a dog without a leash. If you cheer when it bites someone you dislike, be ready to feel like a asshat when it bites someone you like, or just an innocent passerby. But don't blame the dog, and don't look around like everyone else was supportive of this brave new unleashed dog initiative... it was just you.

I agree! We should question these kind of things more.

Why aren't we questioning what burglars do when they rob people's houses?

Why aren't we questioning what soldiers in Iraq do to enemy combatants?

Why aren't we questioning why school children bully other children?

</sarcasm>

We aren't questioning this stuff because it's how the world works. Good luck getting angry and afraid people to stop doing harmful things based off emotions and perceived benefits. When any of these people are caught, we punish them as we are able within the constraints of the law as best we can. There really isn't anything to question here.

:%s/Anonymous/Some random people on IRC/g It's pretty crazy how people jump to treating Anonymous as some sort of cohesive organization - it's not, that's the whole point.

Even so this is not going to make me any friends around here, I am perfectly fine with Anonymous staying a "wild card".

The idea is about "Lulz" and not about saving the whales. Sometimes these actions align with mainstream perception of "justice", sometimes they are not.

Is there really anything to question? What those people did is reprehensible and everybody besides those people knows that. Asking why we aren't questioning what they did is like asking why people aren't questioning what Charles Manson did.

I don't know of anyone who's condoning what they did but:

1) Anonymous is relatively inconsistent ... you can't count on them seeing the bat signal and arriving five minutes every time you need them (maybe they try and fail with some targets)? So even if you could point them at every injustice, would they show up?

2) We don't condone vigilantism for a reason. Everything you read was filtered through the court of public opinion and Anonymous wasn't (as far as I know) privy to any of the underlying discussions.

3) The processes that led to the two firings happen every day in corporate America. We don't need Anonymous for business to continue. And there are very defined labor laws to remedy incorrect business practices.

So while I appreciate that Anonymous will in some cases fight for things I agree with, they're far too erratic to trust. Funny that I feel the same way about my government!

It's like being angry at a nest of hornets.

because what they did was right, make some pressure on a company to "punish" a feminazi bully