Quote:tstone said;
We have an admin section for the same reason we have a government--it's a convenient way to deal with threats. But do you really believe your mods and admins are infallible? Or that they should be beyond question?
right and to tell all the members whats happening would diminish the anbility to do deal with said threats.
Quote:tstone said;
But it still comes down to how much stuff gets deleted? Maybe the names of the soldiers who fired on the civilians from that helicopter should have been deleted. So their families wouldn't be persecuted. Or...maybe the video should simply have been deleted. So the US army wouldn't be embarrased. Where should the line be drawn? Who draws the line?
when crossing it costs even more lives. i think it right the video of that incident was shown. my arguement is the parts of the leak that have a time line which can show those who wish to know that certain info could have only come from certain people. the videos that show atrocities isn't what i'm argueing about. investigations often lead to the guilty party not because they have a name but because they have a solid time line. lots of informers will be living in fear of their lives more so than usual and some my even be killed. i'm saying leave out the leaks that have references to these people. i am not saying stop all of the leaks. my stance against wiki leaks changed when i saw an afghani on the news with his face covered say he and his family has had to move because of the leaks.
tstone said;
Quote:They're already so empowered--they already made the decision--you just don't agree with their decision. But since you believe that they should be the ones who decide what you should/should not be told then you have no basis for your complaint.so are you saying that because i think they should decide i can't then say. i think they decided wrongly? if i vote for a political party and it gets power am i not allowed to voice my disbelief when i think they fuck up?
tstone said;
Quote:How does the majority know that? Answer: because of leaks.
People have short memories. If the leaks stopped, people would forget, and wouldn't care. Until something they objected to was done to them...and not heard about.
the majority knew before the leaks. the leaks in general to tell them anything they didn't already know but some could tell who those who helpd were. (the informers)
seriously do you really think these leaks will make any difference. these too will be out of the publics mind very soon if not already. most won't have even read any of them. all it is, is an empty vessle in that it's filled with what we already know. what we already see every day.
seriously. the majority of the public won't even know who or what wikileqks is. " oh yes they were on the news" they'll say.
Quote:tstone said;
You're allowing your personal dislike of a postman to turn you off having a mail system. Wikileaks is a valuable operation providing a valuable service. Whether the front man is a tosser or not doesn't change that.
no i'm not. my belligerence at wikileaks in general is that i think they made a cock up and i'm have a rant about it. i ranted about these particular leaks before even seeing golden boy lmao.
again, in general i'm for wikileaks, i'm just of a position they got some of these ones wrong, that they didn't really take the time to read what they put out there,
Quote:tstone said;yes, whats wrong with that. my opinion carries no weight on the matter but i'm still entitled to it aren't i? i'm entitled to voice it should i think they've cocked up. the same way i rant about the bp fiasco. my opinion is irrelevant but i can still have it.
Sure, but you've said above that your opinion is irrelevant. You believe other people should decide what should/should not be leaked.
Quote:tstone said;(meaning freedom or truth)
If they're not fighting for it, who is? The people trying to silence them sure as hell ain't.
you again blanket statement my view. i think on this one they went too far. i couldn't care less about their other truths. and lets be clear on this. they are not showing the truth, they are showing other peoples truth. (supposedly)
Quote:tstone said:
Even if you don't believe any good has come out of these particular leaks. You can't deny that some good might come out of future leaks. But if we close down the entire channel because you didn't like one thing they said once, you forgo any possible benefit in future.
More freedom is better than less freedom.
i may have said once even twice in or out of rage or frustration that i hope the die in a fire or some such.
but when it was got down too, i've always said i think the wleaks does a good job and that i just don't agree with this one. if i felt (i know who am i? ) they had took a little more care in their release my view would be different. do i really want wleaks closed down, not really but i know look upon it with less respect than i used too.
with freedom comes great responsibility; in response to More freedom is better than less freedom. lest we unleash all prison inmates
