I'm not fickle - I started having doubts on December 24, 2009 when they shut down the website to beg for money. I started wondering if their goal was money for the founder or leaking things.
My doubts grew larger on September 25, 2010 when Daniel Domscheit-Berg aired his complaints.
And dislike was finalized on October 22, 2010 - not because of what they released, but because they shut down the archive.
It turned from WikiLeaks to AssangeLeaks after that. Instead of releasing anything, they released only what Assange wanted to release.
They have done nothing since to regain the name "wiki". Assange has made himself into the story.
You're making some pretty serious assumptions regarding WikiLeaks' intentions, and even if you're right, assuming whatever advice they offer is good is about more than their intentions, it's about a very difficult international situation that's not going to be simple even if you know the ins and outs of traveling without the US government chasing you.
Yeah, HN readers are fickle. Suggesting we/they should be "loyal" to anything, though, is ridiculous; loyalty is, depending on your point of view, either a way to trap suckers into shitty agreements or something you should only grant to people in whose intentions and abilities you have absolute confidence. I personally don't see either of those as good.
My doubts grew larger on September 25, 2010 when Daniel Domscheit-Berg aired his complaints.
And dislike was finalized on October 22, 2010 - not because of what they released, but because they shut down the archive.
It turned from WikiLeaks to AssangeLeaks after that. Instead of releasing anything, they released only what Assange wanted to release.
They have done nothing since to regain the name "wiki". Assange has made himself into the story.