My second favorite part of this article is how carefully it refrains from actually linking to the Naomi Colvin statement that it’s intended to refute, or quoting it, or even summarizing it, lest anyone see why the author herself agree with it, or, worse, learn that all donations intended for me since early 2017 were actually going to other beneficiaries, including Wikileaks itself — which is to say that cutting me off as a beneficiary hurt no one aside from the other beneficiaries. My absolute favorite part is that it doesn’t even link to what Wikileaks and the Courage board have put out on this issue, or quote it, or even summarize it, because they’ve put out nothing, because they’re cowards.