Cablegate, the Game

An anonymous reader writes "Cablegate: The Game is a game where players can read, tag and summarize the recently released US Embassy Cables. Points are awarded for finding the most tags in a cable." I wish this game were extended to more news sources generally — automated scans are nice, but can't (yet) make all the connections humans can.

Don't Feel Comfortable Helping

[Anonymous Coward]

First, if Assange is being considered the most vile and evil person in the world for facilitating the release of this information (and yet commercial news outlets who work with him to do it and then publish it to a huge audience are *not* treated as evil and horrible or culpable at all), then I can only imagine what they might do to the average john Doe. After all, they could construe this as aiding and abetting "the enemy" (ie, terr'ists).

More importantly, I work with the government through my company which fulfills certain technical contracts with them from a supporting end. I absolutely do not feel comfortable participating in this - as fun as it might be - for fear of it impacting my security clearance. Reading this slashdot article is about as far as I'm willing to push the limits.

Yea I'm a contractor too

[arcite]

Working for the US gov, only I'm not a chicken-shit, brainwashed, sorry excuse for a human being who feels that the truth should be covered up. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

If you really are working for the US Gov (and you're not just a simpleton soldier following orders) you have a responsibility to make the world a better place. Now, please go back to the safety of silence and obedience with the knowledge that your next pay-check from the good American People is on its way.

Re:Yea I'm a contractor too

[xavdeman]

If enough people are neutral a solution would never come to fruition. The saying holds as long as the proposed solution and problem are correctly defined.

Re:What about tags in Assange's arrest records?

[definate]

You are correct, there is no script or formula which a victim follows. However, given there is no significant evidence to the contrary, we can not be expected to take someones word for it, given they essentially looked like anyone else would.

If you do not agree with this, then you're essentially opening up anyone to put anyone else in jail for rape, as you're saying we require no substantiative proof, other than 'a participant said so a week later'.

"no means no" is totally irrelevant here, and is just a strawman argument. The question is whether its reasonable to take only one persons word, later on, in the face of other evidence, as evidence with which to convict a man, and destroy his life.

I don't think it is.

I've been following this reasonably closely, and I don't believe there has been ANY other substantiative evidence, has there?