re: #344 Obdicut

You are missing my point. You do keep skipping between the largest and smallest definition of anonymous whenever it’s convenient for your argument. In addition, you persist in either denying or avoiding the topic of organized groups directing the actions of Anonymous— not through main force, not through visible leadership, but because Anonymous is a mob, and mobs can be influenced by agitators.

My argument, from the beginning, has been against conflating Anonymous (the movement) and Anonymous (the specific group attacking Mastercard et. al.).

My only issue with the bolded portion is the degree of difficulty of doing this: it is very, very low. Agitating Anon into action is a trivial matter.