http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masquerade_ball
Throughout the century masquerade dances became popular in Colonial America. Its prominence did not go unchallenged; a significant anti-masquerade movement grew alongside the balls themselves. The anti-masquerade writers (among them such notables as Samuel Richardson) held that the events encouraged immorality and "foreign influence". While they were sometimes able to persuade authorities to their views, particularly after the Lisbon earthquake of 1755, enforcement of measures designed to end masquerades was at best desultory, and the masquerades went on as semi-private "subscriptions".[2] In the 1770s fashionable Londoners went to the masquerades organized by Teresa Cornelys at Carlisle House in Soho Square, and later to the Pantheon.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The anonymity has been fun, but I think a movement is growing where we are getting tired of a miniscule and vocal minority blending in with the masses, getting most the attention. The masks are starting to come off...we now can identify specific people who are often seen in things like protests, and when the masks come off, the situation or things you see or read on the internet is in a strikingly different light.
Just noticing these things while watching Ferguson protests. Several "agitators" have been called out already because they are frequently seen in multiple different engagements.
http://fox2now.com/2014/10/23/one-mans-protests-push-police-to-the-limit/
http://themissouritorch.com/blog/20...st-revolutionary-agitating-in-ferguson-video/
You certainly look at a group of people a bit differently when all of a sudden things start to become personal....or at least I do in a way. Knowing the background of these things really can influence your opinion of events.
Now that the news has latched on to Twitter as the Bible of breaking news....do we really want to be getting our news from what is basically, a lavish party that welcomes immoral acts?
Throughout the century masquerade dances became popular in Colonial America. Its prominence did not go unchallenged; a significant anti-masquerade movement grew alongside the balls themselves. The anti-masquerade writers (among them such notables as Samuel Richardson) held that the events encouraged immorality and "foreign influence". While they were sometimes able to persuade authorities to their views, particularly after the Lisbon earthquake of 1755, enforcement of measures designed to end masquerades was at best desultory, and the masquerades went on as semi-private "subscriptions".[2] In the 1770s fashionable Londoners went to the masquerades organized by Teresa Cornelys at Carlisle House in Soho Square, and later to the Pantheon.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The anonymity has been fun, but I think a movement is growing where we are getting tired of a miniscule and vocal minority blending in with the masses, getting most the attention. The masks are starting to come off...we now can identify specific people who are often seen in things like protests, and when the masks come off, the situation or things you see or read on the internet is in a strikingly different light.
Just noticing these things while watching Ferguson protests. Several "agitators" have been called out already because they are frequently seen in multiple different engagements.
http://fox2now.com/2014/10/23/one-mans-protests-push-police-to-the-limit/
http://themissouritorch.com/blog/20...st-revolutionary-agitating-in-ferguson-video/
You certainly look at a group of people a bit differently when all of a sudden things start to become personal....or at least I do in a way. Knowing the background of these things really can influence your opinion of events.
Now that the news has latched on to Twitter as the Bible of breaking news....do we really want to be getting our news from what is basically, a lavish party that welcomes immoral acts?
Facebook
Twitter