A reasonable assessment. Thank you. I'd only add that my point was absolutely not that Wikileaks/Assange have always been responsible in their public releases

A reasonable assessment. Thank you. I'd only add that my point was absolutely not that Wikileaks/Assange have always been responsible in their public releases of information. Rather it was that the testimony given (at least as reported by the blog post) gives at least the appearance that Assange/Wikileaks attempted to responsibly (for some values of the term) push these disclosures through journalistic outlets, who, at least at first attempted to provide context around the released, redacted documents. Once there were multiple torrents and hosts for the un-encrypted, unredacted data, there was little point (and little publicity/exposure) in Wikileaks maintaining their encrypted archive. As for other releases that Wikileaks has done both before and since, those aren't really relevant to the current extradition hearing. IMHO, what you or I may think about the broader picture is relevant in a larger discussion, but not one about the current legal proceeding.