the very idea that anonymous could know that someone claiming to be anonymous wasn't in fact anonymous implies a centralized structure to anonymous. someone somewhere would have to know who is part of the group in order to make claims about who isn't. since anonymous has claimed that's not the case for some years now, the person making this denial doesn't actually understand anonymous' structure as defined by anonymous.
then again, i suppose agnosis (no knowledge) and anonymous (no name) have a tendency to go hand in hand..
0 comments:
Post a Comment