I went there once when the site began to gain infamy and notoriety. What I saw was images of real child porn and animal cruelty. Surely you can understand why I might be slightly displeased by people who would produce, distribute, defend and encourage this sort of material, I hope (all claimed to be done by members of anonymous)? Am I really out of line for being upset by harm and suffering inflicted upon helpless children and animals?
Even if it were only underage girls desperately seeking attention from the worse possible crowd or horribly unfunny and annoying memes, that would still be enough reason to hate that place.
From witnessing the words and actions of people claiming to be members of anonymous.
You know someone could beat and rape someone you know and love while videotaping it, then upload it where it is forever circulated on the internet for countless thousands to view your loved one's now immortalized bloodied and crying face for their amusement. And all they would have to do is claim that "anonymous delivers". There is no screening or criteria for "membership" and no rules that govern or dictate what actions are or aren't sanctioned. That's all I'm trying to say, anyone can to anything, making the moniker as a group meaningless. How could it be considered a group when most don't even have any sort of association with one another other than a name?
All it takes to be a member of anonymous is to claim to be a member of anonymous. That's what I meant when I said it was meaningless to give the group any credit. In fact I'll starting saying that I'm a member so I can bask in the glory and victory of those hack attacks.
I hoped we had more common ground than that.