User:AKMask/Brandt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Daniel Brandt
[edit] Introduction
This sub-page is just here to detail my personal dealings with a Mr. Daniel Brandt, the notable eccentric/conspiracy theorist who runs both Google-Watch and Wikipedia-Watch. I am currently listed on his Wikipedia hit list, which are the people he will sue if he ever decides to take off his tin-foil hat so he can get through the metal detector in the court house. I will update this as new things develop.
[edit] The Beginning
I first stumbled upon his page on December 4th, after hearing his name being bounced around for a laugh by one of my favorites, Leo Laporte, in an older production.
I then later found his Wikipedia-Watch hit list. It is a list of people on Wikipedia that disagree with his personal, seemingly mentally disturbed, view on privacy. The express purpose for such a list, quoting off his site, is:
as well as the next gem:
[edit] The Comment
This rubbed me in a very serious manner. As a young man who went to court over his free speech acts in the past, Mr. Brandt should have welcomed the fact that he has become famous enough for an Encyclopedia article. He did not. Instead he acted like a spoiled 8 year old child, trying to use the entry on him for shameless self-promotion, and, when that failed, trying to force us into deleting it outright.
His site did have one redeeming quality, however. I made the following post to the talk page of the Daniel Brandt article:
This was intended as a bit of levity as to User:Lord Bob's comments, which sounded vaguely Jon Stewart-ish.
[edit] The Email
The next day I see my name added to Mr. Brandt's hit list. It lists me as AKMask, Name John Doe #12, in Juneau, AK, US. My offending comment was quoted as "...a complete kook...".
I was vaguely amused, but did not wish to see untrue information presented. I mean, The guy didn't even get my real name. I had to fix this. So I gave him my actual name and date of birth in an email, as well as the request that it at least be mentioned my comment was on a talk page. My email follows:
brock.weller@gmail.com to wikiwatch@earthlink.net
Subject: User AKMask
This account happens to be my own (should you so desire, I will make a note to my usertalk space or your own talkspace to prove it.)
For your records, since you deem me notable enough for your page, my full name is Brock Weller. You already have my residency. Date of Birth is 2/3/86. (February 3rd, 1986, just incase you use reversed month/day format.)
I would appreciate it if you would note somehow that the comment I made was in the talk space, not the article itself, as well as the fact that I made no edits whatsoever (check the edit history) to your article. I have issues with many things that you push for/against, and as such do not feel as if I could write about you in a neutral point of view.
I was waiting for his reply to this email, perhaps to engage him in a debate, or just to verify that I am indeed me. Surprise surprise when the hit list is updated again, the John Doe 12 next to my name is struck through, and underneath it is Brock Weller. My DoB is now listed as 1986-02-03. The list still presents it as if my comment were to his article.
It seems odd that I was not once asked to verify my claims in the email. Perhaps there is a reason, perhaps not
I could have claimed I was absolutely anyone, even some poor soul who could have sued him for libel for attaching those quotes to him. As Mr. Brandt says, you don't need to prove malicious intent if you are not a public figure.
Guess he's lucky Wikipedians are so honest.
- Comment. I object to his having reversed my photograph. But I can't persuade him to correct it. - Kittybrewster (talk) 08:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Names Removed
As of this writing (December 20) all names have been removed from Mr. Brandt's page. Perhaps it is in regards to a hoax a user sent in claiming that a certain editor was someone he was not. Coincidently, Brandt was hosting rather unpleasant words on his page. While I was not the one who carried out this hoax, I did note its possible execution in the above section of this piece.
Now what is the purpose of his removing the names on the list? Why, it so happens to be blackmail. Brandt states:
I took the real names out of the hive mind chart. It will stay that way for at least two weeks. If things get better, the whole chart will disappear. If things get worse, who knows?
Mr. Brandt is trying to force editors into making the article fit his perception of the 'truth'. Frankly, aside from being a possible violation of the law, it is dishonest, appalling, and cowardly. Mr. Brandt knows he can't accomplish anything by suing, and so he tries a backhanded attempt to get his way. Frankly, I'm glad that I have principles. Brandt was already being self-servingly hypocritical in posting information like that in the first place. On one hand he was arguing that the information in his article was a violation of law, and then posting even more personal information on lesser known people on his own site. On the other hand, he's now attempting to extort changes from us.
Which is it, Mr. Brandt? Is Wikipedia in violation of the law, in which case you are admitting that you were too? Or are you admitting that this whole issue was you blowing smoke and there was never an issue?
[edit] The Return
The names have returned to the hit list and surprisingly, Mr. Brandt has returned to Wikipedia. I am currently attempting to get his response to this page.
