Just got this charming missive. If we're not going to do anything about Brandt, I'll just stop editing the article like he wants because I don't need to spend the rest of my life being hounded by a crazy man.

Just one more edit from Jokestress on my bio article, or just one more edit from you on my bio article <b>OR</b> on any of the two Talk pages or my User page, regardless of the nature of the edit -- even if it is ostensibly friendly -- and you and Jokestress are both going into a Google-Watch sidebar with your real names and pictures. I may throw in Sir William Reierson Arbuthnot, 2nd Baronet of Kittybrewster, into the mix as well, since he is part of the Google Groups episode as of today (which makes it relevant to Google-Watch.org). I don't know about him yet because I'm not sure he knew what he was doing. By the way, this is not a threat. It's a promise. Also, I'd advise you to put your real name on your user page, because all of your harassment (please learn to spell this word) from January 5, 2006 until now has been done "without disclosing his identity," which makes you potentially liable for criminal penalties under that new law that you deleted from my user page. It doesn't matter that I've identified you, because you are still operating on Wikipedia as someone whose identity is not disclosed. Yes, please take this to Brad Patrick, Wikipedia's lawyer, in Tampa. My position is that he should be reporting you to the U.S. Attorney in Tampa as part of his legal obligation to protect Wikipedia. If he doesn't, I can raise the issue with the Florida bar. In other words, it would be a conflict of interest for Mr. Patrick to give you any advice on this. Jokestress is off the hook in terms of the criminal statute because she identifies herself on her user page. I'm sending a copy of this to Jokestress by external email. --Daniel Brandt [[User:68.93.142.243|68.93.142.243]] 18:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)