For the record ...

The turnover among Wikipedia editors is so high that most editors today have no idea of the conditions that existed during the first year that I tried to get my biography deleted. There was no policy on biographies of living persons during most of that year. The policy they have now is still much too weak, but it helped during the second year of my effort. Since many of the newer editors are unfamiliar with this history, this old "hivemind" page is preserved for the record.
  —Daniel Brandt



   Hive Mind v. Brandt   


User name
Legal name
Evidence
Jimbo_Wales
(guru/dictator)
Jimmy Wales
St.Petersburg, FL, USA
born:1966-08-07

2005-10-17: about locking down Brandt's bio: "...an impossible and
                  absurd request."
2005-10-17: about two links Brandt deleted at Google_Watch: "Do not
                  remove them again."
2005-12-01: In a letter to Editor & Publisher, he refers to Brandt with
                  words such as "strange rant," "prone to incoherent rants,"
                  "he misrepresents everything about our procedures," and
                  "I don't regard him as a valid source about anything at all."
                  Then he claims Brandt is a "public person," in an attempt
                  to justify Wikipedia's invasion of privacy. But Brandt's
                  photo is nowhere on the web, he doesn't do conferences
                  or give speeches, and he's not on radio or TV.
SlimVirgin
aka Slim
aka Sarah
(administrator)

Linda Mack
aka Sarah McEwan
Swalwell, Alberta, Canada
born: circa 1961

2005-09-28: started article on Brandt (current version)
2005-10-12: responds to Brandt's complaint that he was not notified:
                  "We tend not to do that."
2005-10-15: "I apologize for what I wrote about you as a source."
2005-10-15: "Most of our editors edit anonymously, for reasons of
                  privacy."
2005-10-16: "...stop editing this article ... don't delete valid references
                  or external links."
2006-04-21: instructs editors to remove posts from the Talk page that
                  may have been made by banned supporters of Brandt
2006-04-29: "Brandt is apparently trying to blackmail people ... it is ugly
                  behavior." (This libelous statement was prompted by the
                  fact that Brandt negotiated in good faith with one editor at
                  the editor's request, and they reached a compromise.)
2006-04-29: bans two editors forever for making comments supporting
                  Brandt, and then an hour later, now that they are unable to
                  respond, accuses them of being the same person
2006-05-07: admits that her bans are based not on hard evidence, but
                  rather on her "well-honed linguistic analytic skills"
PhilWiki
(editor)
Philipp Lenssen
Stuttgart, Germany

2005-10-26: starts a new Wikipedia article on Brandt to replace deleted
                  article; this new article is quickly deleted
2005-10-29: a story about deletion is posted by Lenssen on his pro-
                  Google blog, and broadcasted by Google News
2005-10-29: note to Jimmy Wales: "...would like a comment regarding
                  deletion of the article on Google-watcher Daniel Brandt."
2005-11-06: hypes the story again on his pro-Google blog
Canderson7
(administrator)

Craig M. Anderson
Hialeah, FL, USA
born:1971-01-26
2005-10-29: undeletes the deleted article
2005-11-01: referring to "Brandt and his fellow trolls," he comments
                  that "resistance is in fact futile."
Juicifer
aka Jucifer
(editor)
John Doe #3
U.S. psychology professor
age:34; female; anti-Castro
daughters: Deborah, Emily
resides in Europe
2005-10-30 — 2005-11-05: dozens of edits, many of which are hostile
                  to Brandt, with many incompetent edits and additions, and
                  many misspellings
2005-11-02: "Brandt has no say in the matter whatever."
2005-11-17: "Please no more of this privacy nonsence [sic]."
Linuxbeak
(bureaucrat and
IRC bouncer)
Alex J. Schenck
North Scituate, RI, USA
born:1986-12-08

2005-11-04: "He can cry about this until the cows come home."
2005-11-07: aborted the vote for deletion, normally a 7-day process,
                  after only one day
2005-11-08: deletes the open letter to Jimmy Wales on Brandt's user
                  page, knowing it won't be restored because he's blocked
2005-11-08: "...you truely [sic] are just a whiny has-been that never
                  was in the first place..."
2006-04-29: "Brandt has a tinfoil hat on top of his tinfoil hat."
Ta_bu_shi_da_yu
aka TBSDY
(administrator)

Chris Sherlock
Sydney, Australia

2005-11-04: suggests that everyone "point and laugh" at Brandt's open
                  letter to Jimbo
2005-11-05: blocks Brandt for 7 days due to an alleged "legal threat"
2005-12-04: quotes Wales' letter to E&P in Brandt's bio: "I tried very
                  hard to help him, and he misrepresented nearly everything
                  about our conversation in his very strange rant." But
                  Brandt has never had a conversation with Wales!
2005-12-29: "[Brandt is] basically a bit of a goose, and in my opinion
                  somewhat unstable."
BrokenSegue
aka Broken S
(administrator)

Scott Zucker
Wellington, FL, USA
born:1966-11-30

2005-11-04: blocks Brandt for 24 hours
2005-11-07: "If he acts up he'll just get blocked again."
2006-09-10: an editor deletes the Wales quote after Brandt explains
                  why it is inaccurate and unreliable, and that Wales must
                  have Brandt confused with someone else. BrokenSegue
                  restores the quote, explaining that "it is what Jimbo said,
                  and that's all that really matters."
Splash
(administrator)
John Doe #6
Bristol, United Kingdom
2005-11-04: "It's reassuring to know that the subject of an article has
                  been unable to successfully be the final arbiter of its
                  content."
Superm401
(editor)

Juan Rico
Bronx, New York, NY, USA
2005-11-04: referring to Brandt: "Poor baby."
2005-11-04: "Frankly, you're deluding yourself if you think any court will
                  care in the slightest. Nevertheless, that sounds like a legal
                  threat. I'd be careful if you want to avoid being banned."
Doc_glasgow
(administrator)
John Doe #8
Glasgow, Scotland
2005-11-04: "Perhaps we should find a picture of Daniel Brandt with
                  some babes to put on our page about him."
Rx_StrangeLove
(administrator)

Brian Haws
St.Paul, MN, USA
2005-11-04: "You're right, it isn't a privacy problem. But he is very
                  persistent."
2005-11-04: "And in any case we have different inclusion standards."
GregAsche
(administrator)
Greg Asche
St.Louis Park, MN, USA
2005-11-03: "Oh for goodness sakes, stop with the empty threats and
                  stop violating WP:NLT."
2005-11-07: "Him not wanting an article here about himself is no reason
                  to delete this."
Jeffrey_O._Gustafson
(administrator)
Jeffrey O. Gustafson
Brooklyn, NY, USA
2005-11-08: blocks Brandt indefinitely, primarily as a reaction to this
                  page you are now reading
2005-11-11: deletes a highly-relevant quotation from the Florida
                  Supreme Court about invasion-of-privacy, which appeared
                  on Brandt's User_Talk page, on the grounds that it is an
                  "anonymous legal threat"
Lord_Bob
(editor)
Ben Massey
Victoria, BC, Canada
born:1986-12-24
2005-11-09: "...batshit insanity is not a criteria for deletion."
Gamaliel
aka Rob
(administrator)

Robert Fernandez
Tampa, Florida, USA

2005-11-06: added true but objectionable facts from many years ago,
                  which is a violation of Florida's invasion-of-privacy statute
2005-12-18: quotes Wales' letter to E&P in Brandt's bio: "I tried very
                  hard to help him, and he misrepresented nearly everything
                  about our conversation in his very strange rant." (Brandt
                  has never had a conversation with Wales, and this is the
                  second time an administrator has inserted this.)
2006-04-05: vandalizes Brandt's user page and bans him forever,
                  because Brandt explained a new federal law that applies
                  to Wikipedia vandals who fail to disclose their identity
2006-04-05: "He's an attention whore..."
2006-04-25: warns editors, in a new box at the top of the Talk page
                  for the Brandt article, that "you may become the victim of
                  internet stalking, harrassment [sic], or legal threats by
                  the subject of this article"
Obli
(administrator)
Simon Syvertsson
Forshaga, Sweden
age:19

2005-11-10: "Ironically enough, I think this whole affair qualified him for
                  his own article."
Morven
(administrator
and arbitrator)
Matt Brown
Anaheim, CA, USA
age:31

2005-11-11: "Nutcases like Brandt aren't the norm."
FayssalF
aka Svest
aka Szvest
(administrator)
John Doe #11
Manchester, U.K.
born:1974-03-08
2005-12-04: reverts Brandt's effort to deny that he and Jimmy Wales
                  ever had a conversation, causing Wales' negative reaction
                  to a nonexistent conversation to remain in Brandt's bio
AKMask
(editor)

Brock Weller
Juneau, AK, USA
born:1986-02-03

2005-12-05: "...a complete kook..."
2006-04-05: "He [Brandt] is sometimes refferred [sic] to as an 'expert'
                  in matters of privacy. That makes him a public figure,
                  which means his right to privacy is significantly curtailed."
2006-04-25: "He can whine all he wants..."
Lotsofissues
(editor)

Kai Xue
Fremont, CA, USA
2005-12-13: "Can you imagine the numbers of ppl [sic] in his long life
                  that his poisonious [sic] personality has bludgeoned?
                  Brandt's uppance [sic] must come."
Antaeus_Feldspar
(editor)

Joseph Crowley 3rd

2005-12-13: added "See also: Outing" to Brandt's page, with a link
                  to a Wikipedia page by that name, in an apparent attempt
                  to falsely suggest that Brandt is gay
Vilerage
(editor)
Matthew Howard
Delaware, Ohio, USA

2005-12-12: starts Brandt-watch.org in response to this page, and
                  provides a one-click link that visitors can use to launch a
                  denial-of-service attack on the Wikipedia-Watch server
Agamemnon2
(editor)
John Doe #15
Finland
born:1983
2005-12-16: "Brandt is inherently non-notable... Frankly, I am weary
                  of Brandt's hatemongering..."
Izehar
(administrator)
John Doe #16
United Kingdom
2005-12-16: "...trolling and petty tantrums ... I bet that Brandt is one
                  of the most successful trolls in history."
RoyBoy
(administrator)

Dan Gorski
Dundas, Ontario, Canada

2005-12-17: "Brandt needs a wake up call ... privacy ain't what it used
                  to be."
Callum_Derbyshire
(editor)
John Doe #18 2005-12-12: sends Wikipedia-Watch a hoax email, pretending to
                  identify (and defame) another user on this page; the name
                  was posted here for several hours; some Wikipedians think
                  it's cute so he starts an anti-Brandt blog to brag about it
Dtobias
aka Dan T.
(editor)
Daniel R. Tobias
Boca Raton, Florida, USA
born:1963-07-04

2005-12-20: "We should basically ignore all his sniveling..."
2005-12-30: makes false allegations about the legality of NameBase
                  on Philipp Lenssen's pro-Google forum
2006-04-07: incorrectly claims that Brandt edited Wikipedia under a
                  look-alike misspelling of his user name
2006-09-08: on Brandt's notability: "...our bar for inclusion is generally
                  lower than most of the mainstream media."
2006-09-09: "I'd like to see his whacked-out ideas tested and defeated
                  in court."
JiFish
(editor)
Joseph Fowler
United Kingdom
2005-12-24: "...[giving] Brandt control over who edits his bio [is]
                  unacceptable."
Alterego
(editor)
Brian James Mingus
Boulder, Colorado, USA
born:1982-09-08

2005-12-29: makes false allegations about PIR's tax-exempt status,
                  and the legality of NameBase, on Philipp Lenssen's
                  pro-Google forum
Jayjg
aka Jay
(administrator
and arbitrator)
John Doe #22
Williamsburg, NY, USA (?)
works in management
age:in his 40s
2005-12-29: about Brandt: "He's not concerned about privacy; neither
                  his own, nor anyone else's. He's more interested in self-
                  promotion, and this is one good way of doing it."
Dbiv
aka David
(administrator)
David Boothroyd
City of Westminster,
London, United Kingdom
born:1972-11-09

2006-01-01: Brandt deleted one sentence from his bio on the grounds
                  that it invaded his privacy, but Dbiv reverted Brandt one
                  minute later
Amcbride
aka Allen
(editor)
Allen McBride
Durham, NC, USA

2006-01-01: suggests that when Brandt lets the print press quote him
                  on privacy issues, that Brandt automatically becomes a
                  public person for purposes of one sentence about a
                  37-year-old unrelated incident that Brandt tried to delete
Phaedriel
aka Sharon K.
(administrator)
Sharon Kershee Tahsequah
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
born:1979-07-29
member of police dept

2006-01-02: about Brandt: "...no whining allowed."
2006-05-28: posts a long, tearful, and ultimately silly letter on Brandt's
                  talk page: "I cling to the hope that this incident may serve
                  you to think at least for a moment before sending another
                  inocent [sic] into the flames without a reason." (These
                  whiny remarks refer to Katefan0, an anonymous admin
                  who, it was discovered, is a professional journalist with
                  a Senate press pass. Katefan0 tinkered with biographies
                  of members of Congress on Wikipedia. Brandt claimed
                  that her anonymity on Wikipedia represented a conflict
                  of interest, and asked her to identify herself on her user
                  page. Instead Katefan0 left Wikipedia and suggested that
                  Brandt was malicious. Other Wikipedians chimed in with
                  support for Katefan0 and new denunciations of Brandt.)
Geni
(administrator)
John Doe #20
United Kingdom
student
2006-01-17: Brandt tries to characterize himself as an activist on both
                  accountability and privacy issues, but Geni reverts him so
                  that Wikipedia continues to introduce him as someone
                  who is merely "monitoring privacy violations on the web"
69.182.48.34
(evidence suggests that
Pegasus1138 did this)
John Doe #21
Canterbury High School
New Milford, CT, USA
2006-02-12: noticed the new email address for this site and added it
                  to lists requesting ecommerce offers and similar spam
                  (one of the ecommerce spam bots included the perp's IP
                  address, and we also have exact times in our logs; this
                  sort of harassment is now a felony)
Zanimum
(administrator)
Nicholas Moreau
Brampton, ON, Canada
born:1986-11-09

2006-03-16: reverted a comment Brandt made on User_talk:Kittenmarks
                  because as a Wikipedia spokesman, he had to suppress
                  a funny Harvard Crimson story about Wikipedia
Jokestress
(editor)
Andrea James
Los Angeles, CA, USA
born:1967-01-16

2006-04-03: after Brandt removed from this site an image of a letter,
                  this editor reposted it at a free photo hosting site without
                  permission, in order to sidestep Wikipedia's copyright
                  rules; next, she prominently linked to this image of the
                  letter from two Wikipedia articles
Freakofnurture
(administrator)
John Doe #23 2006-04-03: blocks Brandt for unspecified "vague legal threats"
2006-04-07: incorrectly claims that Brandt has edited Wikipedia under
                  ten different aliases
Mackensen
(administrator and
former arbitrator)
Charles Fulton
Kalamazoo College, ' 05
Kalamazoo, MI, USA

2006-04-05: referring to Brandt: "Wikipedia does not negotiate with
                  terrorists."
FireFox
aka Phil
(administrator)
Phil Gibbs
Kent, United Kingdom
born:1990-03-25

2006-04-05: completely deletes Brandt's user page
Zscout370
aka Zach
(administrator)
Zachary K. Harden
Oceanside, California, USA
born:1986-05-29

2006-04-05: "This guy is doing everything under the sun to bully his way
                  onto Wikipedia. He has threatened other users too, and I'm
                  not going to stand by and watch this happen."
Eloquence
(administrator,
developer, and
trustee of the
Wikimedia Fndn)
Erik Moeller
Berlin, Germany
(Angela Beesley, trustee
of Wikimedia Foundation,
is an ex-girlfriend)

2006-04-06: "[If] any person who doesn't like their biography could
                  request it to be deleted, [this] would result in huge gaps in
                  our coverage. WP is an encyclopedia which attempts to
                  accumulate the sum of all human knowledge, not the sum
                  of knowledge which people find tolerable." (vote to KEEP)
Malber
(editor)
Michael M. Alber
Manchester, NH, USA
born:1971-02-22
2006-04-06: lists Brandt on a special Wikipedia page that purports to
                  objectively discuss cranks, kooks, crackpots, and quacks
JzG
(administrator)
Guy Chapman
Reading, United Kingdom
born:1964

2006-04-12: "The guy is a certified kook!"
Gmaxwell
(editor and
developer)

(his girlfriend
Kat Walsh, user
Mindspillage, is a
meta-administrator
and arbitrator)
Greg Maxwell
DeLand, FL, USA
born:1979

2006-04-16: After six months of failing to get any of the half-dozen
                  articles about himself and his sites taken down, Brandt
                  starts detecting visitors from Wikipedia and redirects
                  them to Wikipedia Review. Since Wikipedia has already
                  blacklisted WR, that means all of Brandt's sites need to
                  be blacklisted. This includes the research site NameBase,
                  which has been cited as a reference in a few dozen
                  Wikipedia articles. Greg Maxwell instantly refers to Brandt
                  as someone who "vandalizes huge numbers of pages on
                  Wikipedia ... in effect, [he] has spammed hundreds of
                  Wikipedia articles in one fell swoop."
But Brandt did this
                  without even touching Wikipedia!
2006-04-29: keeps deleting a screen shot of the top of this page on
                  copyright grounds, even though there is no conceivable
                  legal problem whatsoever with the image
2006-09-09: Brandt deleted several lines in his bio that he considers
                  actionable under Florida law, and explained why on the
                  Talk page; minutes later Greg Maxwell reverted Brandt
                  and deleted his Talk explanation on the grounds that
                  Brandt is a banned user
Jdforrester
aka James F.
(administrator
and arbitrator)
James David Forrester
London, United Kingdom
born:1983-03-31

2006-04-23: "Brandt's self-puffery isn't worth our time including."
Kittybrewster
aka William
(editor)
Sir William R. Arbuthnot
2nd Bt of Kittybrewster
London, United Kingdom
born:1950-09-02

2006-04-25: Brandt holds the copyright on an autobiographical essay
                  he wrote in 1992. On 2005-12-15, Gamaliel linked to a
                  library in Ohio that had posted it without permission.
                  On 2006-04-12, Brandt got the library to take it down.
                  On 2006-04-15 Jokestress found the essay on Google
                  Groups and linked to it. On 2006-04-24 Google took it
                  down at Brandt's request. Today Kittybrewster finds that
                  the library's copy is duplicated at Archive.org and links
                  to it. Brandt sends a take-down request to Archive.org.
Jareth
aka Shell_Kinney
(administrator)

Michelle Kinney
Akron, Ohio, USA
born:1975-02-21

2006-04-25: an editor deleted the Archive.org link as a copyright
                  violation, and Jareth reverted this editor without giving
                  any explanation
2006-09-10: deletes from the Talk page Brandt's explanation of why
                  the Wales quote is inaccurate and unreliable, on the
                  grounds that Brandt is a banned user
Marudubshinki
aka Maru Dubshinki
(former admin)
John Doe #28
Riverhead, NY, USA
2006-04-26: "Seigenthaler never had a case, save in the court of public
                  opinion, where (the judgement of various uninformed and
                  erroneous pundits to the contrary) he has decisively lost.
                  I can't imagine you'll do much better. But go ahead and
                  make your empty threats, or sue. It'd be nice to have a
                  good solid precedent to use against cranks like you."
2006-05-13: deleted Brandt's defense against Berlet's criticism so as
                  to sabotage the poll taking place on the Talk page about
                  whether to include this criticism in the main article
Cyde
aka Cyde Weys
(administrator)
Ben McIlwain
Univ. Maryland, USA
undergraduate

2006-04-29: banned editor Strangeland forever, because this editor
                  posted a screen shot image of the top of this page in an
                  appropriate place on Brandt's article, and then when
                  another editor deleted it, Strangeland had the audacity
                  to point out that all the copyright requirements had been
                  fully met for this image
Modemac
(administrator)
Eric Walker
Quincy, MA, USA
age:37

2006-05-06: "In the manner of all good kooks, Mr. Brandt has his own
                  cadre of fans... Brandt has found that he can get a lot of
                  attention by bashing Wikipedia."
Cberlet
(editor)
John Foster (Chip) Berlet
born:1949-11-22
wife:Karen A. Moyer
Burlington, MA, USA

2006-05-13: claims that the article Brandt wants deleted is a "sanitized
                  version, lacking sufficient criticism of Brandt," and then
                  proceeds to attack Brandt on the Talk page because the
                  late L.Fletcher Prouty was on his advisory board at the
                  same time that Berlet himself was on it (1989-1990)
AngryParsley
(editor)
Geoff Greer
Yonkers, New York and
Spokane, WA (parents)
born:1985-03-17

2006-06-15: offered chat logs to this site that were counterfeit, for use
                  on our hive mind chat room search engine. Geoff Greer
                  specializes in scraping content and scrambling it with Perl,
                  and owns a domain (abughrai.be) that was registered
                  under a false name.
NicholasTurnbull
(administrator)
Nicholas Turnbull
West Sussex, U.K.
age:18

2006-07-14: "You know, no matter how much I try to irritate Brandt,
                  he still doesn't add me to that page of his like he threatens."
Fubar_Obfusco
(editor)
Karl A. Krueger
East Falmouth, MA, USA
born:1978-09-14
computer tech at whoi.edu
2006-07-18: deleted the Wikipedia-Watch Accountability Project logo,
                  which illustrated adjacent text in Brandt's bio, stating that
                  the image was "goofy"
Raul654
aka Raul
(administrator,
bureaucrat,
arbitrator)
Mark A. Pellegrini
engineering grad student,
University of Delaware, USA
born:1982-06-19

2006-06 to 2007-03: kept six PIR websites on the Wikimedia Foundation
                  spam blacklist out of vindictiveness, despite protests from
                  other editors
JoshuaZ
(administrator)
Joshua (Josh) B. Zelinsky
Yale, class of 2007
New Haven, Connecticut, USA
age:23

2006-12-10: "There is no reason to let him [Brandt] edit this [Brandt's]
                  talk page."



Dr. Jimbo and Mr. Hive
by Daniel Brandt, November 9, 2005

There is a problem with the structure of Wikipedia. The basic problem is that no one, neither the Trustees of Wikimedia Foundation, nor the volunteers who are connected with Wikipedia, consider themselves responsible for the content. If you don't believe me, then carefully read Wikipedia's disclaimer.

At the same time that no one claims responsibility, there are two unique characteristics of Wikipedia that can be very damaging to a person, corporation, or group. The first is that anyone can edit an article, and there is no guarantee that any article you read has not been edited maliciously, and remains uncorrected in that state, at the precise time that you access that article.

The second unique characteristic is that Wikipedia articles, and in some cases even the free-for-all "talk" discussions behind the articles, rank very highly in the major search engines. This means that Wikipedia's potential for inflicting damage is amplified by several orders of magnitude.

As someone who has been jostling with Wikipedia administrators for several weeks, I am very interested in whom I should sue if I wanted to sue. This assumes, of course, that I've decided I've been clearly libeled by Wikipedia's article on me, and/or the discussion page attached to it. At the moment, this is an intellectual interest of mine, and I am not currently claiming that I have been libeled. This could change very quickly. I maintain that I qualify as a "private person," which means that I do not have to show that the article about me is maliciously untrue. The bar for private persons is lower for a finding of libel, as compared to public persons. I also believe that if I ever succeed in a libel case, the fact that the article on me ranks very well in the big search engines will convince the jury to award damages.

Why did I put up the information about editors and administrators on this page? Simply because if I ever decide that I have cause to sue, I'm not sure who should be sued. The first step, it seems to me, would be to seek a subpoena for log information from Wikimedia Foundation. Administrators and editors who are involved, but who cannot otherwise be identified, could be traced through their IP addresses in the Wikipedia logs. If a court decides that a subpoena for these addresses is in order, then it would also support a subpoena for more information from the Internet service providers behind those IP addresses.

If there is a clear case of libel, I don't believe a court would decide that no one is responsible. If Wikimedia Foundation, and the specific editors and administrators who either inserted the libelous information, or failed to delete it, are all not responsible for the libel, then that would make the libel something akin to an act of God. The Wikimedia process doesn't quite qualify as God, as far as I can tell, although it apparently sees itself as approaching that status someday soon.

I think a probable outcome in court would place most of the blame on Wikimedia Foundation itself, rather than on editors and administrators. The very structure of Wikipedia is geared toward maximum anonymity and minimum accountability. The Foundation facilitates and implicitly encourages situations such as the one in which I find myself.

But I really don't know. What I do know is that the editors and administrators feel that they are untouchable, and the Wikimedia Foundation also feels that it is untouchable because it has a disclaimer. This is not a satisfactory situation for Wikipedia in the long run. If push comes to shove, it will not prevail in a court of law.

I'm hopeful that this controversy over the article on me will help clarify the need for improvements in Wikipedia's structure. There needs to be a greater degree of accountability in the structure, even at the expense of everyone's freedom to anonymously edit anything forever.

The privacy issues interest me even more than the libel issue. Unfortunately, the laws on privacy are less clear, and discussions on privacy will not be as focused. In Florida, where Wikipedia is located, there is an invasion of privacy statute that might apply in this case, even assuming that everything in the article is true. At issue would be the public disclosure of truthful private information that a reasonable person would find objectionable. Would a reasonable person find Wikipedia's mention of facts about my 1960s activism objectionable? Not at the moment, hopefully, and yet it wouldn't take much for this situation to change. Another act of terrorism on U.S. soil, followed by a stronger version of the U.S. Patriot Act, and "reasonable" people might feel that I should, once again, be watched by the FBI, CIA, and local police the way I was in the 1960s. Does Wikipedia consider issues such as this? Of course not — information wants to be free, and nothing must stand in its way.

A greater degree of accountability in the Wikipedia structure, as discussed above, would also be the very first step toward resolving the privacy problem. For me, the two issues stem from a common problem, and both share the same first step toward a solution.


Hive chatter about Brandt

Esteemed encyclopedia editors
discuss the subject of an article

from #wikipedia IRC channel on Freenode

2006-04-26: "evil"     2006-04-26: "one crazy fucker"     2006-04-29: "age bigot"    
2006-04-30: "dickhead"     2006-05-02: "paranoid fruitcake"     2006-05-12: "full of crap"    
2006-05-14: "blackmailer"     2006-05-14: "attention whoring"     2006-05-14: "belongs in an asylum"    
2006-05-27: "freaking nut"     2006-05-27: "idiot"     2006-05-27: "just wants attention"    
2006-05-27: "very successful troll"     2006-05-27: "likes to persecute"     2006-05-28: "insane maniac"    
2006-05-29: "fucktard"     2006-05-29: "cuntfuck"     2006-05-29: "conspiracy theorist"    
2006-05-29: "bastard"     2006-05-29: "internet crazy"     2006-05-30: "zealot"    
2006-05-30: "extorted a minor"     2006-05-31: "not fully sane"     2006-05-31: "an attention seeker"    
2006-05-31: "thinks like a 3-year-old"     2006-05-31: "malicious and stupid"     2006-05-31: "real animal"    
2006-06-10: "fucking douchebag"     2006-06-10: "dickhead"     2006-06-10: "troll"    
2006-06-10: "Saddam in disguise"     2006-06-12: "doody-head"     2006-06-13: "mental problems"    
2006-06-13: "internet nuisance"     2006-06-18: "fatass"     2006-06-19: "bit of a loon"    
2006-06-20: "totally batshit insane"     2006-06-23: "delusional idiot"     2006-06-27: "asshole"    
2006-07-02: "a big dick"     2006-07-04: "a pile of monkey nuts"     2006-07-06: "irritatingly paranoid"    
2006-07-06: "such a bastard"     2006-07-07: "cocksucker"     2006-07-08: "Brandt is a dick"    
2006-07-18: "a spineless coward"     2006-07-18: "sucks really big balls"     2006-07-18: "a big assbag"    

about us                   home page