Comment on An Anonyomous Social Network?

{i}Pan~ Fri, Jul 22, 2011
Dear Elysium,
I am not sure psillypig's comments have anything to do with Anonymous.

His (her?) comments are about the "recovery" community, by which, I can only assume, since it is not stipulated, that he (she?) is referring to 12-step communities in general.

This, to me, is a form of prosylitizing. Psillypig's comment is the equivalent to a Mormon or Jehovah's Witness knocking on my door.

I have a lot of experience with this community. I have family members who are addicts and have been involved in these programs, I have attended a few meetings myself, and I have done extensive reading on the subject.

I have concluded that they are a cult. I see about as much value in them as I do in Scientology, which is to say, none.

I'm not sure what psillypig's comments have to do with Anon, however, I agree with you (if I've interpreted your sentiment correctly) that Anon has both negative and positive aspects to it.

It is, of course, very free form. The nature of Anon deliberately leaves the definition of Anon open to interpretation. That is part of the nature of decentralization.

I have been a vocal critic in direct correspondence with some Anon members over their implementation and methods, but in the whole of it, I see more good than bad, due to it's decentralized character, in spite of individual intentions, and specific actions that I may disagree with.