Intellectual Theft

I meant to say above Wayne Edward Privett is in no way associated with my family.

From Geni's Terms of Use: " If you become aware of misuse of the Geni Services by any person, please contact Geni at misconduct@geni.com. "

Susan Muir

I dont know if you realized but you requested a merge of your father's profile with the profile of your father he created..I cancelled it..

If that is merged then he will be merged with your tree

Angus Wood-Salomon - Susan says Wayne is in no way connected to her family. If this is so, and if in Geni's eyes he is not within Max Extended Family to the profile he created of Susan's father - then once the profiles are merged, she can delete him as manager.

I do not come close to knowing all the details of the case, so do not know if the merge would result in merging him with her tree - or in allowing her to remove him from management of all the Profiles he created of folks within her Max Extended Family. (Can you clarify for those of us reading this?)

it has here that Von Drakenberg is my second great aunts grandfathers wifes nieces aunt husbands fathers wife sisters husbands first cousins wifes first cousins 8 times removed. i'm connected too the bramley, pittman, eather johnson/wallace, taylor, merriam, bateman, brooks, hay, bruce, perry, muir families.

Let Susan follow your suggestion and report it.

I create stand alone family trees for profiles I find interesting all the time, what is the issue?

If someone who is more closely related wants to take over management of the profile they are always welcome..

You can remove managers of profiles if the profile is your close family and not their close family. Go to Actions. If you are both close family, you will not be able to remove them.

Like Donovan I can't see what the issue is here, there is no rule that users can only create profiles for close relatives.

Susan, if you feel that your rights as a Geni user as laid out in the Terms & Conditions have been breached then you should follow Lois' advice and report the matter officially, starting a public _discussion_ in the members forum is not likely to get you the help that you want.
Curators curate the profiles and offer help and advise to other users, they are not the "Geni Police".

I did a bit of checking just to clarify things slightly for going forward.

Private is a claimed profile and active user, with the way he has set his privacy levels there is no way for a Basic account holder to know who created the profile.

As your maiden name is Longbottom and Kieren's mother is a Longbottom you are actually direct blood relations.
In fact your grandfather W.G. Longbottom is Kieren’s great grandfather which would make Kieren your 1st cousin once removed, your suggestion that he is not in anyway connected to your family is simply wrong.

However, your first post suggests that your issue is with Wayne not Kieren so what exactly is the issue?

You say "I don't want him to do the same to anyone elses' account..."
What has he done to your account?

And "...[I] want this problem resolved immediately." Which problem?

Where is the intellectual theft? Where is the fraud?
Is it intellectual theft for Kieren to have the same ancestors as you, or is it intellectual theft for Wayne to work on profiles outside his immediate family?
Either way i can't see where any fraudulent activity is occurring? Are you suggesting that Wayne and Kieren are the same person? That hardly seems likely based on the fact that they are both active users but would be very easy for Geni Administration staff to investigate based on IP login addresses of the computers that the two accounts are accessed from (sort of like digital foot prints).

Kieren Muir a.k.a. Kevin Moore (just several of ailases) has been committing intellectual property theft on another front related to this as well. This is where he is deriving the unauthorized misuse of "von Drakenberg" as a titular suffix; one which he has never had nor will ever have and I speak on behalf of the company in question belonging to the late Nicholas Thomas Logan Weir / Nicholas de Vere. Both we, Nick's publisher of his books, as well as the private family have all issued this "Kieren" cease-and-desist notices of their own accord each, and he appears to continue disregarding them. My question is how can Geni claim the academic credibility it has period if it allows people who are fake to begin with, as in the person creating the main profile starting the account building his/her tree DOES NOT EXIST IN REALITY and is a scam, made up, a phony, an impostor, and then BUILD upon THAT? Is Geni truly serious in allowing this? With zero proof of parents, marriages, birth certificate record matches, etc etc etc. This is not rocket science.

On another related note, several women have come forward to me as a journalist and avid promoter of this website of my own accord, and all dozen+ have told me matching stories of this "Kieren" targeting them through here asking to get married for reasons described as "bloodline/grail" and attempting to sew discord and strife amongst various sub-communities that operate here in the name of the true and correct academic work being conducted under the scope of this website/service.

To allow this sort of ridiculousness PERIOD is a complete breakdown in any sense or accountability on the part of Geni and it should review its policies immediately if it wishes to continue being considered as taken seriously in the worlds of academia and journalism.

From my office in Hollywood,

James Wright

Basically the bar being set here of what is acceptable decorum for this website would be no different than if I logged out, created a new free profile, called myself Rock Vandersmut, listed my parents as John Holmes and Shannon Tweed, and went from there. There would be no problem with this, am I to understand that is correct?

There is so many things geni can raise the bar on but wont so don't get me started Sir James Robert Wright, Kt.

James, it's not clear what your concern is.

If you believe something on Geni violates your trademark or copyright, report it to Geni.

If you believe there is misinformation about the ancestry of HRH Nicholas de Vere von Drakenberg or any other person, start a discussion from that profile. If challenged, you'll be asked to provide evidence and be prepared to have an entertaining debate.

If you believe Geni has a fake prince using its service, I'm afraid you're shouting against the wind. Geni isn't in the business of verifying that everyone on the Internet is who they say they are.

Sir James Robert Wright, Kt.
i notice you call yourself 'Sir' have you been knighted or are you a teacher where we are suppose to salute as Sir

My concern was the allowing of it in the first place. You and Michael both essentially just said Geni isn't in that business of verifying things like that so that answers it. In the meantime, doesn't hurt to have the full information included in the debate.

Meanwhile, I follow all proper channels and functions on here, so I have no "problem" or need to have Geni respond at my beckoned call.

All I would further posit into this is I, were I a Geni Executive, would be slightly concerned that this kind of behavior is going on. I don't allow bad information inside my company; I thought others out there in the business world were of like mind. That is all. I don't have enough time in the day to sit and worry about pests like Kieren so I sympathize with Geni on that part.

I agree with the I don't allow people with no proof nor qullifactions in my company part but sadly that bar is so low it's not funny these days...

Angus, my profile name says "Sir" because I have been Knighted as Templar under the York Rite of Freemasonry, and since that seems to be the formatting of many of my Templar ancestors on here, that's the formatting I went with. It runs in the family. I also have been Knighted in a couple other forms too, but no need to get into all that now.

I have not asked or would ask anybody to "salute me as Sir" because I'm not like that. James will do. I have the medals and diplomas and all that, but I only pull that stuff out for either a journalist to inspect or for a photo op. I'm pretty laid back and casual.

James, I understand your point of view but I think it's impractical. Geni doesn't need to be concerned about its users. They don't work for the company. A user on Geni acquires a reputation corresponding to the quality of their work. A user who starts with an overblown title already operates at a handicap as a presumed crackpot. Lots of backroom chatter about this ;)

I would advise you to re-consider the choice to use your knighthood socially on Geni. No Masonic orders are recognized by other, legitimate orders of chivalry. Reputable orders that are not recognized by the ICOC generally require that their members not use their titles or wear their insignia outside the order's own functions.

Justin,

How, when and where I choose to use my knighthood is of absolutely no concern to you. Various Masonic orders are all having very complicated relationships behind the scenes right now, and I do not owe an explanation to any Masonic reputable orders nor do I owe one to the International Churches of Christ, nor Geni, nor you, nor anybody. I find it both suspicious, insulting and amusing all at once that you are taking issue with me with that, rather than take issue where issue belongs.

I would advise that unless you come to have through some bizarre set of circumstances, some more in-depth understanding of my personal life, to not go opening that can of worms. You never know what Pandora's Box might do inside a place like this, and as of now my intent has only ever been to play nice, abide by the rules, never once fake anything, and not cause discord between any other site users. If my profile offends you, my advice is not to read it. And the same advice would logically apply to the profile of Nicholas Thomas Logan Weir as well.

This conversation is disrupting my chi inside my dressing room at Sunset Gower now. And, I've still gotta get my hair re-dyed platinum Da Vinci Code assassin color blonde. You might like it Justin, kinda that Opus Dei meets Knights Tale look. Mwah from Hollywood and as the head of Nick's corporation, goodnight from beautiful Los Angeles California.

Too funny.

James, the ICOC is the International Commission on Orders of Chivalry, not International Churches of Christ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Commission_on_Orders_of...

Deciding which orders are genuine is exactly the work they do. Creating fake and quasi "masonic" is big business because, as they say, "There's a sucker born every minute".

The ICOC has no legal standing, but their academic expertise is so highly regarded that their rulings are essentially gospel.

Your profile and title don't offend me. I have half a dozen or so fake knighthoods myself, as well as a few fakes titles. I got most of them in the course of doing investigative work. Two or three I would classify as legitimate societies with chivalric ideals but not genuine chivalric orders. The rest are just laughable. I would never dream of advertising any of those titles outside the groups that granted them. Indeed, under the statutes of the reputable ones I would not be allowed to do so.

My suggestion to you comes out of a concern for your reputation, because we've corresponded privately and I know you to be generally level-headed. I'd be happy to discuss the legal foundations of modern chivalry with you, either publicly or privately.

James, I have carefully considered whether to respond to your personal attacks and threats. I think, on the whole, it's better to extend you the personal courtesy of responding so if you choose to continue in that vein you're not attacking the wrong things ;)

1. Yes, I attend Masonic functions. I'm a Mason, as were my father and grandfather and on back to Brig. Gen. Solomon Place, who is said to have been initiated by George Washington. (Not sure I buy that story, but my relatives think it's too good to give up based only my skepticism.) I belong to East Denver #160, one of the leading Traditional Observance lodges in the country.

2. My personal beliefs are surely irrelevant to your title, but I can tell you there's very little of the New Age about me. I think you've jumped to conclusions because I work in the industry. That means I have a high level of interest and knowledge about New Age philosophies but personally, I'm just a garden-variety materialist who attends a Reform synagogue and happens to be fascinated by (and non-judgmental about) religion.

3. I don't find much practical use for the idea of "cardinal sin" except the cardinal sin of genealogy, making up data. Everyone in the western world has Templar ancestors. In my opinion they were all a bunch of religious fanatics, but I accept them along with all my other ancestors who were also noble thugs and thieves. They were all products of their time. However, I don't see why having Templar ancestors would give anyone a legitimate reason to decorate their name with a "Templar knighthood" -- even assuming they have a personal belief system that holds the Templars in high regard.

4. I wouldn't have thought of myself as someone who watches Merovingian profiles "like a shithawk". Interesting to see myself through someone else's eyes. Instead, I would have said that I'm probably one of the top three Geni users with an academic background in the Merovingian period so I have a certain responsibility to help in that area. So I do. Isn't that why you invited me to be on your radio program?

Justin,

What you perceive as personal attacks or threats are of no such sort, I am simply trying to out the simple bottom line facts of the matter, which you have now graciously laid out and I than you sincerely for doing so. I think Ecclesiastically speaking, we must be thinking of two different things in our heads, and yes the offer still stands for an interview to sort all that out because my fascination still stands as well. Where you would assert authorities of certain established academic institutions, I would invoke others as well so that may suggest a second difference in thought pattern on the same subject matter. I have no qualms with you, my vociferous projections are nothing more than a reflection of the passion I feel toward this genre and my own titles are duly stamped, signed and sealed by all appropriate parties involved in any way you wish to examine a secret society. Having Templar ancestors is NOT a reason whatsoever to decorate oneself with a knighthood; again that is something I personally earned and wrote as such as a sort of homage -
noun
1.
respect or reverence paid or rendered:
In his speech he paid homage to Washington and Jefferson.
2.
the formal public acknowledgment by which a feudal tenant or vassal declared himself to be the man or vassal of his lord, owing him fealty and service.
3.
the relation thus established of a vassal to his lord.
4.
something done or given in acknowledgment or consideration of the worth of another:

to said ancestors. You know those of us over at camp Nick de Vere are proponents of the genetic memory theory, so am I guilty of fanstasising about that, yes. So? Would I equally fantasisze about living in some old run down Scottish castle in the highlands, yes, so? That's part of my personality and part of the work I do. Hollywood Studios seem to recognize my titles with no reservations and so far ol' Nick's work seems to continue unabated. Nick used to speak of the "derkesthai" (to see clearly) and I sometimes find certain things I see on here fascinating, to put it one way....

Nothin' but Dragon Hollywood Love,

James

James, good enough. It's your way of presenting yourself to the world. No one can argue with that.

However, we've left everyone else hanging so I'm going to forge ahead a bit and give a brief overview of this area.

In conventional legal theory the only legitimate orders of chivalry are those that have a fons honorum (fount of honor), which must be a sovereign recognized in international law.

Even so, most knighthoods are orders of merit rather than orders of chivalry, even though they might use chivalric forms.

The prefix "Sir" is considered to be appropriate only for knights who are British citizens holding an award from the British crown. Americans who are knighted don't get to be "Sir" but they get the appropriate suffix. The form "Sir Firstname Lastname, Knight" is considered to be appropriate only for British knights bachelor (knights who don't belong to an order). If a knight belongs to an order, the suffix should indicate the order. (Of course, you must follow the rules for your order, even if they are wrong according to everyone else.)

Broadly speaking, people who create fake orders use one of the following strategies:

1. Someone starts a new church, then has the church give them a knighthood. Hard to argue legal theory with someone who is standing on religious freedom.

2. Someone starts an order, then gets the patronage of a bishop, often a patriarch in one of the Eastern Orthodox churches. Bishops in general are accustomed to giving their approval to various types of prayer societies, and eastern bishops don't come from a chivalric tradition so they don't always recognize the fraud, and if they do, it doesn't really matter to them. Again, no one wants to argue with religious freedom.

3. Someone starts the order, then gets the patronage of a junior member of a formerly royal family. Even better if that junior member can make the argument that they were cheated out of territories where they would have been sovereign. This dodge depends on someone's politics. Hard to argue with someone if they claim to believe that their patron is the true King of X.

4. Someone starts as a legitimate knight, then falls back on the original idea that any knight can make another knight, perhaps not knowing that this right is considered to have been superseded early on by the rule that only a sovereign can make a knight.

5. Someone constructs a genealogy that appears to show they are the "true heir" of a royal family, then as pretender to the throne of (whatever), they start a new order. This dodge is problematic because it's generally agreed among experts that the right to create new orders belongs only to a reigning sovereign or to one who has been forced out but not abdicated, and not to his or her heirs who never reigned.

6. Someone starts their own country, then claim to be a sovereign entitled to create new orders of chivalry. I think we have one, maybe two, Geni members who took this route.

7. Someone is a freemason who breaks off to form a new masonic splinter group, then leverage the myth that the masons were secret heirs of the Templars to form yet another modern Templar order. This sort of thing has been going on at least since Chevalier Ramsay in the 18th century. There are hundreds of these already. This strategy can be tricky because the conventional view that someone who is a knight by virtue of membership in order partakes of the collective knighthood of the order and loses it if he leaves. The Templars are also particularly tricky because they didn't confer knighthood -- someone had to be a knight before they could join as a knight.

8. Someone finds a reference to a medieval order, whether chivalric or not, and claims an unbroken transmission through some underground channel.

There are hundreds of groups who have taken one or more of these paths. All of them can be very lucrative for the founder.

Now, some of my chums will be annoyed because I've just given people a template for committing fraud ;)

We have a Fake Titles project, if anyone is interested:
http://www.geni.com/projects/Fake-Titles/25774

[We Interrupt the Our Regular Scheduled Programming for this Service Announcement]

Martin,

I think this subject and conversation is relevant considering the root issue being addressed originally.

Speaking of the Grand Circus of 'Fake Titles'!!!

Queen Victoria was Bastard- I demand Genetic test's be done to prove who her father really was!

And that obscure Noble pig farming family, the Saxe-Coburgs should not be allowed to falsely use the Name: Windsor (much less Elizabeth II using the Title of 'Queen' of England or any where else).

I demand Justice! :P

Thank you.

[This has been a Service Announcement, Now Back to Our Regular Scheduled Programming]

A banner day. We finally found a fake that Martin doesn't love ;)

Score Update:

Dragons : Bad

Freemason's : Good

Templar : Bad-ish

Over-all Results:

'Bias' has surfaced, it's an Academic free for all!

Someone get the hose, the fire is blazing!

ok ok ok let us please get back to the subject of the post..

I dunno, Angus. I'm pretty partial to dragons. I'm thinking I've been called to defend their reputation ;)