WikiLeaks Insiders Resign 210
Americano writes "Wired reports that at least six WikiLeaks insiders, including Daniel Domscheit-Berg, WikiLeaks' spokesman in Germany, have resigned in the past few weeks. Those who have spoken with Wired cite differences and disputes with Julian Assange, and his autocratic leadership style, as the motivation for their departure. From the article: 'Key members of WikiLeaks were angered to learn last month that Assange had secretly provided media outlets with embargoed access to the vast database, under an arrangement similar to the one WikiLeaks made with three newspapers that released documents from the Afghanistan war in July. WikiLeaks is set to release the Iraq trove on Oct. 18, according to ex-staffers — far too early, in the view of some of them, to properly redact the names of US collaborators and informants in Iraq.'"
Oh really (Score:3, Interesting)
Flameware (Score:3, Interesting)
Domscheit-Berg: what are the agreements re iraq? i need to understand what the plan is there, and what the constraints are Assange: "A person in close contact with other WikiLeaks activists around Europe, who asked for anonymity when discussing a sensitive topic, says that many of them were privately concerned that Assange has continued to spread allegations of dirty tricks and hint at conspiracies against him without justification. Insiders say that some people affiliated with the website are already Assange: brainsorming whether ther e might be some way to persuade their front man to step aside, or failing that, even to oust him." Domscheit-Berg: what does that have to do with me? Domscheit-Berg: and where is this from? Assange: Why do you think it has something to do with you? Domscheit-Berg: probably because you alleg this was me Domscheit-Berg: but other than that just about nothing Domscheit-Berg: as discussed yesterday, this is an ongoing discussion that lots of people have voiced concern about Domscheit-Berg: you should face this, rather than trying to shoot at the only person that even cares to be honest about it towards you Assange: No, three people have "relayed" your messages already. Domscheit-Berg: what messages? Domscheit-Berg: and what three people? Domscheit-Berg: this issue was discussed Domscheit-Berg: [Redacted] and i talked about it, [Redacted] talked about it, [Redacted] talked about it, [Redacted] talked about it Domscheit-Berg: lots of people that care for this project have issued that precise suggestion Domscheit-Berg: its not me that is spreading this message Domscheit-Berg: it would just be the natural step to take Domscheit-Berg: and thats what pretty much anyone says Assange: Was this you? Domscheit-Berg: i didnt speak to newsweek or other media representatives about this Domscheit-Berg: i spoke to people we work with and that have an interest in and care about this project Domscheit-Berg: and there is nothing wrong about this Domscheit-Berg: it'd actually be needed much more, and i can still only recommend you to finally start listening to such concerns Domscheit-Berg: especially when one fuckup is happening after the other Assange: who, exactly? Domscheit-Berg: who exactly what? Assange: Who have you spoken to about this issue? Domscheit-Berg: i already told you up there Assange: those are the only persons? Domscheit-Berg: some folks from the club have asked me about it and i have issued that i think this would be the best behaviour Domscheit-Berg: thats my opinion Domscheit-Berg: and this is also in light to calm down the anger there about what happened in 2007 Assange: how many people at the club? Domscheit-Berg: i dont have to answer to you on this j Domscheit-Berg: this debate is fuckin all over the place, and no one understands why you go into denial, especially not the people that know about other incidents Assange: How many people at the club? Assange: In what venue? Domscheit-Berg: in private chats Domscheit-Berg: but i will not answe
Re:Oh really (Score:3, Interesting)
When an organization has been publicly demonized by a government, it's hard to avoid thinking that if it falls apart, it's due to the actions of that government.
One piece of why this explanation may be BS: If these volunteers wanted to continue working for the cause Wikileaks represents, but without Assange, they could fairly easily set up their own servers, see if Assange is interested in releasing the Wikileaks data to them, and even if not set up a forked project. If they're worried that it's become too autocratic, their forked project could be formally more democratic. These volunteers probably have the skills, experience, and cajones to make this sort of thing work. So not doing anything like this suggests that this is similar to a politician wanting to spend more time with his family.
At the same time, I've run voluntary organizations before. Volunteers come and go all the time, sometimes over policy disagreements. That's just the way it is.
how is wikileaks safer than 4chan? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:how is wikileaks safer than 4chan? (Score:5, Interesting)
Because they hopefully some expertise whereas the random guy who wants to leak something probably hasn't even heard any of the terms "proxy chain", "tor", or "4chan".
Because wikileaks claims to do some checking which will give the leak more weight than some random post to 4chan.
Because wikileaks has media contacts and can push the leaked data out to them, which would be very hard for most people to do anonymously.
Re:Oh really (Score:2, Interesting)
Wow the idea that Assange is narcissistic
No, the idea is that Assange has suddenly become intolerably narcissistic at just the same time as big players want to discredit him. Now, it is possible that the publicity has gone to his head, but it's a slightly more complex idea than yours.
Stand Tall and Proud WikiLeaks (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Flameware (Score:1, Interesting)
I'm not up on my Wikileaks history other than that it was founded in 2007. Big question here seems to be what happened in 2007 that would anger (the CCC || people in the CCC)?
Re:Flameware (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Ahh...the Sweet Irony (Score:2, Interesting)
FTA: "When he quizzed Assange in an online chat, Assange responded by accusing Domscheit-Berg of leaking information about discontent within WikiLeaks to a columnist for Newsweek".
Which is when Domscheit-Berg tries to change the subject, gets all pissy and starts whining about how nobody likes Assange.
You know, FTA...
Re:Flameware (Score:3, Interesting)
Instead, his only concern is the leak itself
Which is deliciously ironic... apparently the seekers of transparency, themselves, need not be transparent. Nice.
Meanwhile, Assange's paranoid need to root out this defector is clearly preventing wikileaks from actually doing the job they exist to do, as evidenced by that very transcript.
redacted? (Score:3, Interesting)
Domscheit-Berg: [Redacted] and i talked about it, [Redacted] talked about it, [Redacted] talked about it, [Redacted] talked about it
And here I thought that no secrets were worth keeping.