I'm lost as to where I should put this topic...

with the large reading base of people who do recieve Playboy...


i'll be one to admit.. hte first time i ever looked at playboy i was more interested in the articles... lol


those that ARE willing to bare all are doing it for Anonymous more than themselves since their names are not going to be posted.


it also shows we're not afriad of publicity like scientology is... that we're not afraid to bare 'all' that we're about.

we KNOW there will be negativity posted by scilons about us being adulterers... but if our story reaches a wider fanbase and scientology DOES see how far this fight is going... theyre going to be afraid as fuck now that such popular media is on our side... Maxim, Radar, Playboy (with the highest fanbase of them all?)


tits are nice, i wont lie.. im a man... ive never bought one of those mag's for myself... but just like maxim.. i would buy it souly for the article.



just my views on it...

im not someone who's thought 'hey... all women need to show tits or get the fuck out'... and even if they didnt show them but had any article at all in the magazine... that would be such amazing publicity for our cause.


to call this desperate is something that is completely unneccisary at this moment in the fight...


we're winning.. we have the numbers. we have more of a silent following from the public than they could ever think of getting back. we're winning.... slowly but surely. if we were against the ropes or being pushed back into a corner, #'s dwindling... then sure, THAT would be desperation.

if some anons are comfortable enough with themselves and their bodies and willing to spread good word about anonymous in the process.. isnt that a win on our part? it would be evn more epic if they were planning on it in the first place and just dropped that info, but this can work too.


there are Great articles in playboy and maxim.. and those one usually dont involve tits.


lets hope that either way (if it does go through, since i doubt it actually will happen, knowing how anonymous is late for everything)... that htey post an article about who we are and what we're for.



Daftkid... What are your crimes? :O jk...





FTP



Ps...













Gargy for Intergallactic Federation President

p.p.s... @ your comment daft....



its never dead if one person is against it...



V is a great example of that, fictional or not.

1 person can have a voice.

Ghandi, Martin Luther (Vandross, jk.. ) King Jr. The man standing in front of those tanks...

monks who burned themselves alive to protest the war back in the day...




if you believe in something.... and others are against you... doesnt mean you're wrong.


unless it involves pedobear... then i </3 you... :O



FTP

Have you guys been to the thunderdome?
You're all on crack if you think anonymous is not full of cam whores.

Thanks for bumping this because I honestly think this is important for reasons beyond my own apparently (kid <3).
Our argument is, YEAH there will be some story about the raidfags and how it all started etc etc, but it woulf be taken seriously. The fanbase is interested in playboy for a reason. It's not because of the good read. There's naked women in this magazine therefore whatever is in this magazine is readable but will it be taken into consideration? The fuckers on enturb think I'm prude, a moralfag, against the cause etc, and we all know that's not true because you guys have talked to me and been around me, plus I'm from the internet . I've been with you guys since Feb 10th. I don't agree on everything because let's face it, somethings are just down right ridic, but it doesn't mean I don't want anons to get noticed out ther, just in a more positive light. "Showing tits for a good cause" won't be taken seriously. In anyway one puts it. We're already labeled as the internet haet machine, bigots, uncaring monsters, so I can care less about what people, let alone scilons, label us after the story is published. Like kid said, there were no half naked pictures of anons in that magazine, and the story on us made both sides seem ridic. Which in my taste, is good. Now having this "FEMANON" article in playboy divides the males and the women in a way because in anonymous, who the fuck cares if you're a man or woman, who the fuck cares if you're black or white. We are Anonymous. Legion. Etc. I think kid is saying this is desperate because we could be trying to get coverage from RESPECTABLE magazines (Time, Newsweek, anything other than fap material). And we're just settling because alot of people read it for the boobs and turn ons. If playboy didn't have the pictures in there, they would lose ALOT of readers. So since we're settling for low standard coverage, we most likely won't be able to reach the target of being taken for serious fucking business. Because most of the people who agree with the coverage in playboy say that this is serious business+boobs...oxymoron kthnx
O_O
It's trashy. If looked in the magazine and saw a picture of a woman posing, you wouldn't be like "Hey there sexy lady. I'm gonna take you seriously and close the book so you won't see me fap. I'm going to be modest and gentleman like etc."
Stop faking the funk, people.

ANONdur wrote:

Have you guys been to the thunderdome?
You're all on crack if you think anonymous is not full of cam whores.

YEAH BECAUSE THUNDERDOME=ALL ANONYMOUS EVERYWHERE

Anonymous is not attention whores. i thought you all knew that. someone somewhere is doing it wrong.

Daftkid wrote:

Anonymous is not attention whores. i thought you all knew that. someone somewhere is doing it wrong.

NO U!

I didn't say that. Just said the thunderdome is proof that a lot of anonymous are cam whores. But lets get down to serious business, then.

What exactly is so negative about playboy coverage? Will we really lose followers because of it? Will it really make us seem like our cause is worthless? What does showing tits have to do with being internet hate machine and bigots? Are all the people covered in playboy bigots?

Nobody is saying, I hope, that people are going to see anonymous in that magazine and say "Oh shit, scientology sucks" Personally I think it's OBVIOUS people will go "*zip* fap fap fap fap fap" but that's not the point. The point is that people who see that article are going to SEE ANONYMOUS.

"Haha what was that one article I fapped to last week about? Some anonymous in guy fawkes mask... let me google it hmmm"

Also concerning other coverage, who says we're not trying to get coverage of more serious nature? Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean we're out looking for trashy magazines. Not all magazines deliver.

ANONdur wrote:

I didn't say that. Just said the thunderdome is proof that a lot of anonymous are cam whores. But lets get down to serious business, then.

What exactly is so negative about playboy coverage? Will we really lose followers because of it? Will it really make us seem like our cause is worthless? What does showing tits have to do with being internet hate machine and bigots? Are all the people covered in playboy bigots?

Nobody is saying, I hope, that people are going to see anonymous in that magazine and say "Oh shit, scientology sucks" Personally I think it's OBVIOUS people will go "*zip* fap fap fap fap fap" but that's not the point. The point is that people who see that article are going to SEE ANONYMOUS.

"Haha what was that one article I fapped to last week about? Some anonymous in guy fawkes mask... let me google it hmmm"

it makes anonymous look desperate for attention so they are attention whores.
the same people who think daft is prudeand an moralfag say that it is serious business because it helps out the cause. daft and me are saying that it won't because people won't take it seriously. that is the negative part about it. because if you want to be seen, fine, do it faggot do it. but the cause is to dismantle the cult. not for everyone to see our boobies.

right?

I'd type a reply, but I can't see my keyboard through this double facepalm.

Daftkid wrote:

but the cause is to dismantle the cult. not for everyone to see our boobies.

right?

The cause is what you make of it. You do it your way, they'll do it theirs. If you're so against it, then don't give them tits (obviously you're not even at question). Don't complain about those who will, though.

So complaining=giving opinion.

Lovely.

I'm gon' go play GMod now.

And yes, kid, somewhere someone is in fact doing it wrong.
get on vent.

complain.?
i'm questioning this because i'm new to it.

You are calling people out for doing something that you're not willing to do.

Daftkid don't you think you should contribute to anonymous before you call everybody out like you are?

Oh wait, you already show up to protests every month. *facepalm*

Oh you...

http://mattdavisopenshismouth.com/2008/08/alex-haleys-life/
http://www.portlandmercury.com/news/selling_scientology/Content?oid=862344

The first link is a blog post on Matt Davis' blog. It's pretty interesting -- I'd never heard any of this before. I'm sure you can figure out the relevance.

The second link is the Portland Mercury article that Matt Davis wrote about Jeff Hawkins (ahem, that would be my brother-in-law Jeff Hawkins). Matt is shopping this article around in the hope of getting national attention. He also intends to write a follow-up article. Please feel the need to add comments.

Quote :

Haley conducted the first interview for Playboy magazine. The interview, with jazz legend Miles Davis, appeared in the September 1962 issue. In the interview, Davis candidly spoke about his thoughts and feelings on racism and it was that interview that set the tone for what became a significant feature of the magazine. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Playboy Interview with Haley was the longest he ever granted to any publication. Throughout the 1960s, Haley was responsible for some of the magazine’s most notable interviews, including an interview with American Nazi Party leader George Lincoln Rockwell, who agreed to meet with Haley only after Haley, in a phone conversation, assured him that he was not Jewish. Haley remained calm and professional during the interview even though Rockwell kept a handgun on the table throughout it. Haley also interviewed Cassius Clay, who spoke about changing his name to Muhammad Ali. Other interviews include Jack Ruby’s defense attorney Melvin Belli, Sammy Davis, Jr., Jim Brown, Johnny Carson, and Quincy Jones. He completed a memoir of Malcolm X for Playboy six months before Malcolm X died in February 1965. The memoir was published in the July 1965 issue of the magazine.

-_-'
I never knew about this.

Playboy often surprisingly has very intelligent interviews and articles besides the overall pictures it is known for. I've even read an Edward James Olsmos article in an 1980's issue.


I would go crass and mention that Rule 34 never fails, but Playboy is pretty respectable for its articles.

and they have good recipes... :O




Dur... Kid is trying to be involved how he can be since daft will not let him go to protests.


hes just giving his input on a matter he believes in and isnt that what we're all doing anyways?



Daftkid is anonymous in my eyes...


even if he is a kid, :O

Oh no, FTP. Kid's mother doesn't allow him to go places with me anymore. And she doesn't support this.

in b4 overprotective mother

that sucks..


my parents dont support this at all, :O




but yep, protective parents and sister.... be lucky bro, not everyone has that