Does the group Anonymous have caucus meetings with chapters all over the world

1. What “Anonymous” is said to be — decentralized idea, not a formal federation

Reporting in the provided selection frames Anonymous as a loosely organized, international network or “idea” rather than a hierarchical body that holds official, recorded caucus meetings and chapters worldwide; those accounts explicitly note that “anyone can act in the name of Anonymous” and that the movement functions as an open, inspirational label more than a formal group ^{[1] [2]}. This characterization implies actions and campaigns can be claimed under the Anonymous name by disparate actors rather than being coordinated through a central set of chapters.

2. Why that decentralization matters for meetings and “chapters”

Because Anonymous is described as diffuse and open, the conventional markers of organized groups — regular, centrally recorded caucus meetings, intergroup governance, and official chapters reporting to a headquarters — are unlikely to exist under the Anonymous banner according to the sources provided ^{[1] [2]}. The same reporting warns that this openness allows both politically motivated actors and opportunists to operate under the name, producing “fake claims” and opportunistic uses of the label ^[1].

3. What the sources do show about formal groups that do run global chapters and meetings

The supplied material includes multiple examples of explicitly organized movements with intergroups, scheduled web meetings, conventions, and regional chapters — notably Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous. AA lists international conventions, hybrid gatherings, and local meeting lists with published schedules ^{[3] [4] [6] [7] [8] [9]}. Narcotics Anonymous publicizes web meeting dates, a World Service Conference and quarterly PR web meetings ^{[5] [10]}. These examples illustrate what formal, chaptered global meetings look like in practice, helping contrast them with how sources describe Anonymous ^[1].

4. Evidence (or lack of it) for Anonymous-style “caucus meetings”

Available sources do not mention formal, scheduled caucus meetings or a chapter-based reporting structure for Anonymous comparable to AA/NA intergroups and conventions; instead, coverage stresses Anonymous’s decentralized nature and the risk that actions attributed to the name may come from unaffiliated individuals or groups ^{[1] [2]}. If local, ad hoc meetups occur among people who identify with Anonymous, they are not documented in these provided sources as an official global caucus network.

5. Competing perspectives and caveats in reporting

The provided pieces offer two consistent but distinct framings: one asserts that Anonymous is alive and continuing to inspire actions in 2024–2025, functioning as a “symbol of digital protest” ^{[1] [2]}; the other emphasizes the risks of decentralization, including “fake claims” and misuse of the name ^[1]. Both perspectives are present in the same sources: they agree Anonymous persists as an idea and a banner for action, but they disagree on whether that translates to organized, accountable chapters — the reporting leans toward “no” for formal chapters ^{[1] [2]}.

6. How to verify further (given the limits of current reporting)

To confirm whether any localized groups calling themselves Anonymous hold recurring, coordinated caucus meetings, investigators would need primary documents or announcements from those local groups, logs of scheduled meetings, or reporting that explicitly documents a chapter network — none of which appear in the materials given here (available sources do not mention localized chapter meeting schedules for Anonymous). By contrast, for AA/NA the same type of documentation is present in the supplied results ^{[3] [4] [5]}.

7. Bottom line for your question

Based on the provided sources, Anonymous does not have an identifiable global system of caucus meetings and formal chapters like the intergroups and conventions run by Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous; instead, reporting describes Anonymous as a decentralized idea that individuals or small groups may act under, meaning any “meetings” would tend to be informal or ad hoc and are not documented here as a formal chapter network (p1_s9, ^[2]; contrast ^[3], ^[4], p1_s6).