Re: Anonymous.

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Anonymous <anonymous@whyweprotest.net> wrote:

Great to hear it. I did most of the work with the authors who did the articles in Maxim and Radar for us. It would be great to see something go into Rolling Stone.

It seems that everyone who sides with scientology ends up with comments that fall more on our side.

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, Anon-

Sorry for the delay in reply; working on a big project (I'll tell you a bit more about it soon, as you might find it interesting in relation to what you've been doing). Will be writing another piece on Anon with this interview next week, I think; might try to get something placed in Rolling Stone, as I've started writing for them. Will have more questions for you soon. Also, you might find this amusing - some conservative blogger was defending CoS yesterday and even his own readers called him on it:

http://trueslant.com/barrettbrown/2010/02/23/don-surber-sides-with-church-of-scientology-over-st-petersburg-times/

On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Anonymous <anonymous@whyweprotest.net> wrote:

1) How is it that a given project or campaign gains recognition and commitment among Anonymous while others don't?

Subjects that tend to resonate well with Anonymous on a whole are often controversial or relevant to matters of online freedom. Merely resonating well with the group is rarely enough to to kick off a major movement. Projects such as Chanology and Freeweb are the product of a mixture of momentum, timeliness and luck.

It begins with a promising subject that makes its way around the internet. If there is enough outrage or humorous potential, it reaches the chans and temporarily monopolizes the attention of Anonymous. When on anon, or a small group working closely together, decide that the cause requires action they take the first steps. Media such as posters, flyers, and videos are created and posts are made calling other anons to arms.

Not all such calls are heeded. Sometimes the initial organizing group lacks the necessary skills, knowledge, or vision. Other initiatives fail because Anonymous on a whole perceives the call as an attempt at manipulating their collective power for an individual's gain. Such beliefs are so strong that the phrase "not your personal army" has become a staple of Anonymous slang.

Individuals or groups hoping to catalyze an Anonymous movement must posess great humility and self-control. Their role is, and can only ever truly be facilitating an entertaining or meaningful experience for their fellow Anonymous to embark upon. There are no medals, no recognition, no financial gain for such individuals; more often than not if these groups are identified they are ruthlessly attacked by the very Anons they helped rally to the cause.

2) What is the unifying characteristic of Anonymous, if any?

Very few things bind Anonymous together. Internet access, a taste for controversial or dark humor, and thick skin are obvious essentials for anyone inhabiting the chans. Many who participate in Anonymous movements do not come from these ranks, however. These Anonymous join for very different reasons. Some will do anything for a laugh, some feel deeply about a particular cause, others feel a strong tie to the internet as a concept.

3) Do you see any entities in history that you would consider to be predecessors to Anonymous?

I do not believe that Anonymous as a group is the first to organize in different ways. However I also do not know of any collective or concept that really comes close to being a predecessor to Anonymous. One bit of noteworthy information is that many philosophy, anthropology, and sociology students have studied or observed Anonymous for various classes at college. None of them to my knowledge have been able to describe Anonymous in a way that anonymous could agree with unanimously. Personally I think that Anonymous as a concept is ancient, but the full potential of Anonymous has not been reached yet.

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
Anon-

I've got a few questions for you to start out with, more to come.

1. How is it that a given project or campaign gains recognition and commitment among Anonymous while others don't?

2. What is the unifying characteristic of Anonymous, if any?

3. Do you see any entities in history that you would consider to be predecessors to Anonymous?

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:

Anon-

Thanks for getting in touch. I'm about to step out, but will get back to you at further length either tonight or in the morning; we've got a lot to discuss.

Thanks,

Barrett Brown
Brooklyn, NY
512-560-2302

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:06 PM, Anonymous <anonymous@whyweprotest.net> wrote:

Hi Barrett,

I am the owner of the church0fscientology youtube account which launched project chanology 2 years ago with the Message to Scientology video. I am also, as you can see by the email address, an admin at whyweprotest.net. I handle most of the press for all the projects Anonymous does. I wanted to introduce myself and just make sure we had a line of contact if you ever wanted to ask any questions.

We are very happy with the article you wrote. I spent a lot of time working on press for the titstorm guys over the last few days. Sending out the big press release, answering and interviewing with abc, bbc, and so on. Its been busy. It is nice when someone actually gets Anonymous. So few journalists do.