Thursday 25 February 2010

Edwin Erickson a little infatuated perhaps?

At around 10:30 PM (yesterday now) I noticed a new member on Twitter, WAPwatch. At first I thought it might be my old internet friend resurrected. But alas, it is not. My old nemesis would have been a little bit smarter and I would not have been able to figure out the real identity so quickly.

Here are two screen shots taken at the same time. You will see the first posts of WAPwatch. (made at 8:23 PM. according to Tweetdeck)

And here you will see his followers. (Note: I have blocked out the other follower from the screenshot at their request, as they are no longer following)

You will note that the first follower, Edwin Erickson started following WAPwatch a full four hours before the first tweet. Before even one Tweet with any hash tags was posted.  The only way he could have known about the account and started following it before any tweets, was if he (or a cohort) created it.

Since then Edwin Erickson, I mean WAPwatch has been going through all of my followers and has started to follow them.

I suspect by morning WAPwatch will also be following everyone I am following.  Interesting that he chose pink for a background color. Presumably to lead one to believe it was a woman. Or maybe Edwin really does like pink.

Editted to add:
Joanne points out in the comments that this timestamp is of his last Tweet. And I stand corrected; I took it to be the follow time. Nonetheless, clearly he was the first on the bandwagon of this unusual twitter'er. I see this morning the following list is a mirror image of those following me.

Edited to add:
You will no longer find me on his list as I have now blocked him. I recommend my family do the same.


  1. Lets see, Erickson didn't know how to follow basic rules which led to his aiding in destroying the Green Party. Erickson is now ignoring basic political rules/regulations and is threatening to kill the fledgling Alberta Party before it even leaves the gates.

    Now Erickson is breaking the most basic rules of anonymous internet blog/tweet trolling.

    LOL, the twit couldn't even stay anonymous for a couple hours.

  2. I don't think that makes sense...I think the "6 hours ago" just reflects when that specific tweet was sent out. He could have sent out a tweet then, later, seen WAPwatch (while browsing through hash tags) and decided to follow it. Do you see what I'm saying?

  3. Joanne,

    Yes, I think I get what you are saying. I will make note of that in the blog.

  4. I got the same Twitter notice last night. I blocked it as I do with anything that is called "____ watch".
    Instead of working to solidify his own party/movement, this is how he spends his time? Cyber-following people who are nothing more than members of a political party? If he represents the braintrust of this Alberta Party entity, the WAP has absolutely nothing to worry about.

  5. In fairness Leigh, we can't say 100% it is him.

    I can see why someone might react like this given my last few blog entries shedding light on the Alberta Party, but following my family is a bit over the top. IMO

  6. Nope,I'm calling BS. If he had created WAP Watch, he wouldn't need to be following it. If he is following it, maybe he sees an opportunity to pick up some points. Personally, I blocked it when it came to my mailbox.

  7. I think BS was already called, albeit not with that word...LOL

  8. You have acknowledged the flaws in your Twitter logic, so perhaps you want to set the record straight instead of publicly defaming someone based on innuendo. Ironically, the more 'research' you do on the Alberta Party, the less credible you seem.

  9. Though I pointed out your flawed Twitter deduction, I think your posts on the Alberta Party have been quite revealing.

    We are on opposite ends of the political spectrum, but I appreciate those who put their cards on the table and nudge those who don't...I find the AB Party/Renew approach to politics cowardly at worst and disingenuous at best.