If Wikileaks is more important than the possible sex offence (as it probably is) then you should ignore info about Assange’s personal life. Of course, one should also bear in mind the long term effects of high-profile individuals being seen to get away with sexual assaults.
Given that I am not remotely interested in a single crime that may or may not have taken place between two people who I will never meet (and neither should anyone else be, unless they avidly follow all rape stories that take place anywhere in the world), I would say that the comparison still comes out strongly in favour of ignoring the case and focusing on Wikileaks.
The interesting thing is not the crime, but the obvious overreaction to it by the Swedish prosecution (by comparison with their reaction to many similar allegations that come up regarding other people). It’s clear that this is not the typical modus operandi. What is unclear is whether it’s one person chasing a high profile case for fame or political gain, or whether it’s a larger movement to attempt to discredit wikileaks.
I agree with that fully. All I was saying is that I have no real desire to learn whether he actually committed the rape (as has been pointed, the reaction is interesting either way), since I am not a perfect rationalist and learning this may well contaminate my beliefs about Wikileaks in general
If Wikileaks is more important than the possible sex offence (as it probably is) then you should ignore info about Assange’s personal life. Of course, one should also bear in mind the long term effects of high-profile individuals being seen to get away with sexual assaults.
The above equation seems very wrong. A better one would be to compare:
(Importance of Wikileaks) * (probable level of added ignorance about it, if you follow the court case)
(Importance of sex offense) * (probable level of added ignorance about it, if you refuse to follow the court case)
Wikileaks is probably more important, however if you choose to ignore the court case, your probable level of ignorance about it is much higher.
Given that I am not remotely interested in a single crime that may or may not have taken place between two people who I will never meet (and neither should anyone else be, unless they avidly follow all rape stories that take place anywhere in the world), I would say that the comparison still comes out strongly in favour of ignoring the case and focusing on Wikileaks.
The interesting thing is not the crime, but the obvious overreaction to it by the Swedish prosecution (by comparison with their reaction to many similar allegations that come up regarding other people). It’s clear that this is not the typical modus operandi. What is unclear is whether it’s one person chasing a high profile case for fame or political gain, or whether it’s a larger movement to attempt to discredit wikileaks.
I agree with that fully. All I was saying is that I have no real desire to learn whether he actually committed the rape (as has been pointed, the reaction is interesting either way), since I am not a perfect rationalist and learning this may well contaminate my beliefs about Wikileaks in general