No, you have it all right, SeeYaBye.
When anonymous becomes Anonymous, I guess it takes on a whole new meaning? Are a group of unidentified people outside the scope of "people"? Is a flying object any less a flying object when it is unidentified?
A lesson in English: (The Little Brown Handbook, 7th Ed.):
Proper nouns and adjectives to be capitalized...
POLITICAL, SOCIAL, ATHLETIC, AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS AND THEIR MEMBERS
(Examples:) Democratic Party, Democrats, Sierra Club, Girl Scouts of America, Scouts, B'nai B'rith, Rotary Club, Rotarians, League of Women Voters, Boston Celtics, Chicago Symphony Orchestra
Is the Guy Fawkes mask the "uniform" of the "organization" called "Anonymous"? If so, I demand a membership card!
Anyone can be "anonymous". That is the brilliance of this "brand" as you call it GUMBY. Personally, I don't see anonymous as a brand but as a concept: anonymous = unidentified persons = people without identity. According to the rules of English, it would not be capitalized unless it were some kind of actual organization or association. If I join WWP and post there anonymously, if I participate in that activity, am I am now a member of an organization? If I don't post there but I show up at a protest with a mask on, am I now a "member" of an "organization" whose title requires a capital A?
My point is anyone can call themselves anonymous or be referred to as anonymous. Any bank robber, hacker, poster, protester, letter-writer, voice, criminal, do-gooder, citizen, etc. can be anonymous. You might as well be starting threads titled: "People arrested in Spain for hacking", or "People robbed a bank" or "People leaked documents to wikileaks". Perhaps GUMBY, you will no longer want to be associated with "people" because they do bad things, because your premise seems to be something like: "I don't want to be associated with these anonymous criminal hackers". Well, GUMBY, are
with anonymous criminal hackers? AFAICT, no one has associated you with anonymous criminal hackers, except you. Oh yeah, you and scieno-corp. GUMBY, this thread is completely irrelevant to operation clambake. So far your attempt to make it relevant has failed imo. So, some hackers were arrested. So what? How has this changed anyone's ability to protest scientology? What evidence do you have that shows this makes one bit of difference when it comes to exposing scientology's criminal behavior?
GUMBY, if anonymous is a "brand" as you say, then they can be likened to, let's say, Coca-Cola drinkers. Anyone can be a Coca-Cola drinker same as anyone can be anonymous. That changes the headline to: "Coca-Cola drinking hackers arrested in Spain". According to you, now the Coca-Cola brand is "tainted" and people won't trust people who drink Coca-Cola because now, anyone who drinks Coca-Cola will be associated with hackers! You are too funny!
Please show some evidence (other than the illogical workings of your own mind) that this makes one bit of difference. Okay, perhaps a few other random dildos will also "associate" people who expose/protest scientology, with hackers. There's some evidence at least, that random dildos do in fact exist.
Oh and one more thing, when "anonymous" hackers are arrested, they are no longer "anonymous". Are they still "anonymous" after booking? If not, then what are they? Do they now belong to the hacker group called "identifieds"? Will they now be associated with persons of known identities who protest scientology?