I'm going to stand out here, but I didn't actually like the essay. While it started solely as a stylistic distaste stemming from the continued use of first nam

I'm going to stand out here, but I didn't actually like the essay. While it started solely as a stylistic distaste stemming from the continued use of first names, which immediately makes a work sound less professional to me, it just continued along not really making a point. Yes, these people are in opposition to those other people, who are in opposition of the US government, but we knew that already. I was hugely put off when it sounded like (to me, I admit I may have been projecting) he was insulting Assange's demeanor, specifically the stuttering part, because it doesn't seem relevant to the point being made. Mostly, this seemed like a piece of entertainment, not giving a new view our new information.