Re:Lack of ability to correct and warnings. (Score 1)

Wikileaks clearly doesn't have anything special to offer on physical security. Existing whistleblower NGOs do have something to offer here and so talk it up. However, that a whistleblower would be unaware of the dangers they face is about as likely as a lone animal walking off a cliff in broad daylight. There is nonetheless mention on the Wikileaks site of the primary danger to the whistelblower, which is the possibility of the leaker's identity being determined on the basis of who had access to the information, and the explicit disclaimer that Wikileaks can do nothing about that.

Concerning inability to edit the pages self-describing Wikileaks, and also any mystery surrounding the core of the Wikileaks initiative, both are necessary to reduce exposure to powers that would like to render Wikileaks impotent, or better still, non-existent, e.g. the Chinese government.

As for the scarcity of reference to Wikileaks on the part of advisory board members etc., this is bound to change as the profile of Wikileaks rises and it's reputation solidifies in a positive manner. Perhaps this will require a series of verified accurate leaks, given the strikingly broad hostility and suspicion in the Jan 11 discussion thread concerning Wikileaks on Slashdot. http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/11/185 9218