Talk:Brian R. Cartmell

There is no reference given to support this statement: "Cartmell left Internet Entertainment Group before they lost the case" ...referring to the Candyland cybersquatting case. So for the time being, I've moved it here, until someone can provide a ref for it. Neoconned 22:22, 3 Jul 2004 (EDT)

---

Anonymous user 168.143.113.124 posted the following material to this article, which I have moved to the Talk page:

Anonymous advocates for the Center for Media and Democracy have offered this sentence as a cushion against any criticisms of their radical, leftist agendas, but as accepted practice in SourceWatch is to regard a mainstream media article as sufficient evidence to sustain an assertion, then the assertion that "these guys come from the far side of liberal" would be considered, by SourceWatch's own standards, sufficiently supported by mainstream reportage.

Who is Neoconned?

"Neoconned" is the anonymous author of both the Brian R. Cartmell and Michael Moore Hates America pages on SourceWatch.com., appearing to act specifically as an advocate for Michael Moore and working in tandem with the staff of the Center for Media and Democracy. While the Center for Media and Democracy created SourceWatch.com as an "open content" website "which entrusts citizens from all walks of life" to post information, both Sheldon Rampton and Diane Farsetta , both staff members for the Center for Media and Democracy, have personally deleted and/or slantingly edited comments posted which have been supportive of either Brian Cartmell or the film 'Michael Moore Hates America', often reverting posts by supportive citizens to reflect only the biased comments that Neoconned has personally posted him/herself. Neoconned has also posted potentially libelous statements against Brian Cartmell on PRWatch.org's forums (another Center for Media and Democracy website). Considering that Neoconned, from June 4th to July 5th, originally authored and has posted 33 edits to the Brian Cartmell SourceWatch page, as well as authoring and posting 20 edits to the 'Michael Moore Hates America' SourceWatch page,it begs the question, "Who is Neoconned, and what is Neoconned's connection to both Michael Moore and the Center for Media and Democracy?"

I have the following response to these comments:

1. I consider it hypocritical for anonymous user 168.143.113.124 to complain that "Neoconned" is anonymous. I have no idea who Neoconned is, but he (she?) is not entirely anonymous. He has registered with the SourceWatch and has a history of other edits here. By contrast, 168.143.113.124 (who is in all likelihood Cartmell himself) is posting as an unregistered user, even taking the extra step of hiding behind an IP anonymizer.
2. The reason that I have deleted some of 168.143.113.124's contributions from the Brian R. Cartmell article is those those contributions are off topic. The contributions I deleted consist simply of repetitious whining by 168.143.113.124 about our alleged "radical, leftist agendas." This is not an article about the Center for Media and Democracy. It is an article about Brian R. Cartmell. If there are inaccuracies in it, Cartmell himself is entitled to correct those inaccuracies. He is not entitled to fill it up with off-topic whining. If he does so, however, he ought to have to integrity to do so under his own name rather than hiding behind an anonymizer.
3. It is also worth noting that Neoconned has handled this dispute in a manner that is both more straightforward and more fair-minded than 168.143.113.124. He hasn't simply deleted all of 168.143.113.124's contributions. Where there is evidence to support them, he has retained them and incorporated them into the article. (Neoconned hasn't even deleted the passage from the Village Voice that describes John Stauber and myself as leftists. All he has done is point out context from that same passage which undermines 168.143.113.124's attack.) By contrast, 168.143.113.124 has on more than one occasion deleted information that is demonstrably correct, such as a statement by Cartmell about gays that was an accurate quotation, taken from Cartmell's own blog. If there are any inaccuracies remaining in the Cartmell article, the remedy is to correct those inaccuracies and present evidence to support the correction. Instead of doing that, 168.143.113.124 has merely added bluster, vague allegations about our "leftist agenda," and empty threats of legal action. This sort of hostile behavior is not likely to win him many friends here.

--Sheldon Rampton 23:30, 5 Jul 2004 (EDT)

In addition to what Sheldon said, I have these comments:

>> often reverting posts by supportive citizens

Aha. I guess you must be referring to the posts from a computer at DV-ENT, the studio where they're finishing MMHA? (via mail.dv-ent.com) I guess they're just ordinary 'supportive citizens', right?

>> Neoconned has also posted potentially libelous statements against Brian Cartmell on PRWatch.org's forums

You seem remarkably keen to make unfounded, specious threats of legal action on Brian Cartmell's behalf, 168.143.113.124. I wonder why?

>> what is Neoconned's connection to both Michael Moore

None. None whatsoever. I have no connection of any description with him.

>>what is Neoconned's connection to... the Center for Media and Democracy?

That I use this site. Nothing more. Given that this is an open-access site, to construct conspiracy theories about putative connections between the CMD and regular users seems far-fetched, to put it kindly. --Neoconned 23:53, 5 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Oh I forgot - a relative of mine gave me a copy of Rampton and Stauber's book 'Weapons of mass deception' last Christmas. Does that now make it a conspiracy? :)) --Neoconned 00:07, 6 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Note that 168.143.113.124 has responded to these comments on my talk page rather than here, under the new username Commieconned. --Neoconned 05:14, 6 Jul 2004 (EDT)

---

I edited a recent post on the Cartmell legal action vs La Plante. 1) There were some links to the same page and material duplicating what was included earlier in the page, which made it look like it had been cut and pasted from somewhere else. 2) There were a few unreferenced bits that on balance, I thought were better deleted. 3) The statement that no evidence had been presented re damage is better left out for the moment as it is not clear, given that the case is in the preliminary stages, that such evidence should have been presented by now. It may just be due/coming further down the track. 4) I would prefer more references for some of the other material too. --Bob Burton 23:39, 10 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Edit changes

There were several statements in the last section on the court case that were unreferenced and would be difficult to verify. Apart from which they were a little tangential to the article. I have reduced the section to the essential material though the last par still needs checking but I have left it there for the moment. --Bob Burton 14:37, 15 February 2007 (EST)

Other material I have relocated from the article page is as follows (wtih comments interspersed as appropriate):

The receptionist working at Newman and Newman on December 4th 2006 informed La plante that there was no judgement against him and neither Cartmell or his lawyers were seeking payments of any kind from La Plante.

The original Judgement was granted to cartmell after La plante refused to answer questions outside of the courtroom. Although La Plante had invoked his 5th amendment right, the courts granted Cartmell the judgement because La Plante did not at the time, have the resources to answer the court effectively according to the court rules fo King County Washington.

Unsourced and difficult to easily verify. A little peripheral to the section on the profile anyway.

As the case was requested for dismissal BY CARTMELL, no judgment in the case can be upheld. This is also clearly defined IN THE COURT RULES OF KING COUNTY WASHINGTON.

This sounds logical but better detail is necessary.

Since the lawsuit was dropped this portion of this article has been changed by unknown sources several times.Several paragraphs and references to parties named by Cartmell and his lawyers in the case have been removed along with the actual case number WHICH IS: NO. 04-2-17647-6SEA

I have worked the case number into the article but the rest of the commentary is unnecessary.

Any doubts about the authenticity of the FACTS posted to this article as of 2:21am central time of 12-07-06 can be cleared up by simply calling the king county clerk of courts office in Seattle Washington.

On 11-15-06 La Plante sent an open request to Cartmell and his lawyers for any factual proof or evidence of any legitimate judgement that would hold La Plante liable for any monetary debt owed to Cartmell. Not only has this request gone unanswered but no mention of it apears on La Plante’s credit report.

Unsourced and not essential information.

LaPlanre's Offer of Documents

La Plante has offered to send copies of the complete case files to anyone who can pay for the duplication and shipping. There are over 10,000 pages. La plante can be contacted by email at: Fulcrum9@excite.com

The case files are also available upon request from the King county clerk of courts in Seattle Washington.

re Removed text

The following text was deleted by Salbertfrank. While his reason for its removal is that is is not supported by a reference is fair enough, he/she doesn't dispute the accuracy of it. Nor would enforcement of an award be included in the court records. Instead of deleting it I have relocated it here pending someone confirming it or otherwise. --Bob Burton 21:34, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

However the Judgement has not been enforced after the case was dismissed.

Cartmell has made no attempt to collect for the judgement and no credit agency has made any legitimate effort to collect it. The Clerk of courts for King County Washington has also confirmed that there is no outstanding Judgment against Justin la Plante.

Edit Note

I have relocated this unreferenced section. Even with a reference it seems more appropriate for an article on eNIC than Cartmell. --Bob Burton 01:40, 8 June 2007 (EDT)

eNIC employed Casey Corr as director of communication who would later become the communication director for the mayor of Seattle Greg Nichols, Greg Nichols also had an office at Brian Cartmell's eNIC corporate headquarters during his first mayor election where he work closely with his fund raiser Colby Underwood.