Looks like he fucked up alot, too much personal info for someone with his stakes:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/03/stakeout-how-the-fbi-tracked-and-busted-a-chicago-anon.ars/2"The alternative to the hierarchical power structure is based on mutual aid and group consensus. As hackers we can learn these systems, manipulate these systems, and shut down these systems if we need to."
I never had any kind of philosophical discussion with him, but in general that whole group seemed more focused on tearing down than building. It seemed the idea was everyone would eventually join in the system of "mutual aid and group consensus", but if they did not agree violence would be threatened and used to get their way. Thus leading to an ever growing circle (and cycle) of violence. It is better to start from imperfect yet stable then build and replace. "Do-ocracy" or whatever.
It kind of shows a failing of the NAP, any social structure (not saying the current one is ok) can be interpreted as committing violence towards the individual and therefore legitimatize an aggressive response.
