[Ghost Spaghetti]

What does "they always do" mean anyway? Can you point out instances in which they gave up on something after a few days?

Of course:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous

Granted, some of these were intended to be "one-off" instances of public shaming or raising awareness of a story, but any time they hold themselves out as standing in opposition or "declaring war" on a government, institution, or organization, they fizzle out after a short while and business as usual resumes for their opponent.  Some of the big examples there are Scientology, whom they've been "at war" with on and off for years, the WBC, Paypal, and agencies that crack down on copyright infringement.  I guess it's hard to be a vigilante when you're still in high school.

>not gaining results of standing in opposition means they weren't actually standing in opposition

ok sadaam

I'm just going to assume you're hellbent on hating the Anonymous, seeing as you're going as far as to hurl baseless insults at them for no reason, and don't actually have anything meaningful to say on the matter.

We can all name examples of Anonymous slinking off and becoming irrelevant. Can you name any occasion where one of their opponents actually crumbled under Anonymous 'attack?' Apart from perhaps a few people on Tumblr or Twitter, of course.

[Blanko]

What does "they always do" mean anyway? Can you point out instances in which they gave up on something after a few days?

Of course:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_associated_with_Anonymous

Granted, some of these were intended to be "one-off" instances of public shaming or raising awareness of a story, but any time they hold themselves out as standing in opposition or "declaring war" on a government, institution, or organization, they fizzle out after a short while and business as usual resumes for their opponent.  Some of the big examples there are Scientology, whom they've been "at war" with on and off for years, the WBC, Paypal, and agencies that crack down on copyright infringement.  I guess it's hard to be a vigilante when you're still in high school.

>not gaining results of standing in opposition means they weren't actually standing in opposition

ok sadaam

I'm just going to assume you're hellbent on hating the Anonymous, seeing as you're going as far as to hurl baseless insults at them for no reason, and don't actually have anything meaningful to say on the matter.

We can all name examples of Anonymous slinking off and becoming irrelevant. Can you name any occasion where one of their opponents actually crumbled under Anonymous 'attack?' Apart from perhaps a few people on Tumblr or Twitter, of course.

How is that relevant?

[Saddam Hussein]

It's relevant to people bringing up Anonymous's involvement as if it really matters.  Ultimately, they have very little political or social power.  It's not unreasonable to point this out.

>not gaining results of standing in opposition means they weren't actually standing in opposition

No, it's stopping what they were doing that indicates they were no longer standing in opposition.  For example, if their method of protesting an organization was to DDOS their website, then logically we would expect a dedicated group to continue their attacks until they achieve the desired result.  That doesn't happen with Anonymous.  Their attacks always stop after a few days.

[Blanko]

It's not unreasonable to point this out.

It is, however, unreasonable to only make frivolous accusations and insulting remarks without adding anything substantial to the discussion.

[Pete Svarrior]

They'll get bored after a few days and go back to 4chan.  They always do.

So far, they're doing okay for themselves.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/one-day-later-anonymous-already-takes-down-3-824-pro-isis-twitter-accounts-496258.shtml
http://news.softpedia.com/news/anonymous-activists-begin-leaking-the-names-of-isis-members-and-recruiters-496308.shtml

Say what you may about Anonymous as a "group" - a mob of angry nerds is not entirely incapable of causing trouble.