EX RA WCU ALUMNI site needs help

West Coast University went out of business in 98.
Many of its graduates including some dear friends since have problems with transcripts aceptance etc.

One of my friends shared this email with me and I desided to post it here ans emailed it to my other friends.


DEAR WCU ALUMNI, ALMOST 8 YEARS HAS BEEN PASSED SINCE WCU WAS CLOSED. AFTER I FOUND IT, I OPENED THIS SITE AND DEEPLY APPRECIATE ALL MEMBERS WHO JOINED TO OUR SITE. RIGHT NOW I HAVE SOME DIFFICULTIES TO MAINTAIN THIS SITE. SO I LIKE TO ASK YOU HELP TO MAINTAIN AND UPGRADE THIS SITE. I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THIS SITE IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US. I DO NOT ASK ANY FUND RAISE BUT I DO NEED YOUR TIME IN ORDER TO UPDATE INFORMATION AND MAKE NEW LAYOUT FOR NEW SITE. CURRENT SITE WAS MADE BY MYSELF (I'M NOT WEB DESINGER). SO IT DOES NOT LOOK PROFESSIONAL. I WILL KEEP HANDLE ALL RELATED EXPENSES AS LONG AS I CAN DO. IF YOU CAN HELP I WILL DEEPLY APPRECIATE IT. IF YOU WANT TO PARTICIPATE BUILDING THIS SITE TOGETHER PLEASE SEND ME E-MAIL TO [email protected] . PLEASE REMEMBER THAT POSSIBLY I HAVE TO CLOSE THIS SITE IF THERE IS NO ANY HELP OR SUPPORT. SMALL HELP WILL WORK GREATLY. THANK YOU AND BEST REGARDS, JOHN CHEON (MMIS 91)


Learner

 

I am puzzled. If that was an actual quote from an email, I am somewhat shocked that the person who authored that email with that many grammatical errors and 'loose' use of the english language graduated, especially from a school that was regionally accredited. It is my understanding that one should have a mastery of the english language to attend and graduate from a school in the U. S. A. Is that why the school lost accreditation or did it just dissolve?

I hesitate being judgmental but I can't come to a reasonable conclusion that anyone with that simple level of the english language could be awarded a degree. My english professors would have failed anyone with a less than college level command of the language.

Just my view point.

 

Quote:

Hi,

Thank you for oyur e-mail and support.

To rebuild and upgrade WCUAA, a few alumni who live in the great Los Angeles area will have meeting at next Saturday. We will discuss about the current problems and will find the better way for WCUAA. Then, updated information will be sent to you via e-mail.

Once again, I deeply appreciate your support.

Thank you and best regards,

John Cheon

End Quote:

 

If we're talking about the West Coast University that was founded in 1905, and closed between October 1996 and March 1997; and was predominantly an engineering school attended by many working engineers and technicians in the Southern California aerospace industry; and was originally located at 440 Shatto Place, Los Angeles CA 90005, but which building, today is identified with a sign which says "Dunkking Royal University of Oriental Medicine;" and which, according to the CHEA web site, was ultimately located at 4021 Rosewood Avenue in Los Angeles, CA 90004; and which is listed on numerous "closed colleges" web sites with Mr. John Cheon as the contact...

...then, if then, just for starters, your closing date is wrong. Also, the CHEA database shows that the university with that name, at that address, was ACICS accredited, not regionally accredited (and if it's closed, why is it still in the CHEA database?). And then there's Robbie's perfectly astute observation which, though he didn't say it this way, clearly raises big red flags.

Additionally -- and, for me, this is a big one -- if wcuaa.org is an "alumni" site operated by Mr. Cheon, then why is it trying to look like a current, active university web site?

An alumni site should be, unambiguously, an alumni site. It should not try to give the impression that the defunct university maybe isn't so defunct, as this site is clearly trying to do.

It's worthy of note that yet another web site exists, claiming the same address, but using at least one different phone number, and which seems to address the issue of transcript requests. Click here to see it.

So, what's going on here? Is this a case of a perfectly good university having closed, and the alumni trying to make it look like it's still open so that they won't have so much trouble getting others to accept their degrees? If so, I agree that they need to have some way of conveying the truth of their situation on the web; and of being able to get transcripts from an authorized source... but I'm not likin' this very much!

And why is there a transcript problem? When most accredited universities close, they leave their records in the care of another accredited university, or with the state's department of education... depending on the state. Why wasn't that done? Or, if it was, why doesn't the web site just tell people what happened; explain that the degrees from it are, no matter what, still accredited; and then refer those needing transcripts to the college or university (or state governmental office) that's handling transcript requests? Why does the alumni association have to make the whole thing seem so questionable by trying to make things appear different than they actually are?

What the heck's the deal, here?

 

Gregg from what I remember reading in the past and email from a frind, the second web site you are talking about is a relativly new university that uses the same name, they are CA state aproved
and on another site I read also maybe they have National accreditation now, the new WCU offers limited number of programs for healt management professionals I think.

Now in 2000 or late 90s they the new WCU agreed to purchase the records form the old WCU, so they can provide the transcrits
to their graduates.

And there is another site that is in Chaina "domain" posting copies of the old WCU catalog and never tels that they were closed.
This site is a diploma mill.


Learner

 

Look here for another thread on this topic.

Cheers,

George

 

Nothing in the two previous posts, or the thread to which one of them linked, changes my opinion: If wcuaa.org is an alumni site, then it needs to look like an alumni site, and not like a current, active university site. To do it the way it's doing it is misleading and disingenuous... and suspect, to say the least. As far as I'm concerned, people need to be warned about the wcuaa.org site just the same as any diploma mill site. I know exactly what wcuaa.org is doing. It's trying to look like a real, active university web site (instead of just an alum site) so that prospective employers when coming to it, will not realize that it's closed... or would, at least, have to look very, very closely to figure it out.

That is wrong. Period. It's unethical... and is little different from someone who obtains a degree from a school before it becomes accredited (which means said degree is unaccredited); and then, after said institution becomes accredited, said degree holder either doesn't correct people who assume his old degree is accredited because the institution from which he got it is now accredited or, worse, said degree holder flat-out lies and tells people his degree is accredited knowing that it's unlikely anyone looking-up the institution and finding it accredited would think to compare the accrediation date against the date the degree was conferred. What wcuaa.org is doing is in the very same genre of unethical as that example. The very same.

The help with the wcuaa.org web site that I can offer your friend, Mr. Cheon, is to stop insulting the intelligence of prospective employers and others; and stop putting the reputation and credibility of all WCU alumni as risk, by giving the false impression that WCU -- the old WCU -- is still a going concern.

There would be no problem, whatsoever, taking down that clearly misleading wcuaa.org web site and erecting, in its stead, a simple front page that is unambiguous about the fact that it's the old WCU alumni site, but that visitors should not be quick to click away from it because it contains some very good and important information for both WCU grads and others who, for example, might need a transcript or wish to verify a degree. Then provides links to other pages on the site that give the history of the old WCU; that explain what happened to it; that explains how it was accredited and assures, therefore, that any degrees from it, even though it's now closed, are still accredited; that the old, regionally-accredited WCU, upon closing, transferred all of its transcripts and records to the new, nationally-accredited WCU and that that is where authorized transcripts and degree verifications may be obtained, etc., etc., etc. And then, that same front page can link to the alumni part of the site where membership is talked about, and Josten rings may be purchased, etc.

There is no substitute for the truth. And there is nothing more potentially or actually harmful to all concerned than trying to decieve in any way... even if the reasons, ultimately, are good ones. I'm sorry that old WCU alumni are having a rough time of it because no one in any official old or new WCU capacity made sure that the public, and prospective employers of its graduates, would be easily and clearly advised in the premises; and would easily be able to request transcripts and verify degrees. But responding with smoke and mirrors is not the right approach, no matter what.

This is very disturbing to me. I hope, Lerner, that you can convince Mr. Cheon to do the right thing more or less immediately.

 

Email from WCAA

HI, THANK YOU FOR YOUR E-MAIL. THIS IS AMAZING. THIS SITE COPIED A LOT OF STUFF FROM WWW.WCUAA.ORG. I WILL DISCUSS ABOUT THIS MATTER IN THE COMING MEETING WITH OTHER ALUMNI. ONCE AGIN THANK YOU VERY MUCH. - JOHN

 

Lerner,

Why do you say "email from WCAA" when it's from John Cheon of WCUAA?

What does Mr. Cheon mean by "[t]his site copied alot of stuff from WCUAA.ORG"? What site is he talking about? And copied what? What does he mean?

And what do you mean by posting this email here? What, precisely, are we to glean from it?

Are you starting to see, now, why you can't just copy and paste things with no additional, explanatory information? These posts of yours need your words (of explanation or commentary) in them, too... along with clear indicators of which words are yours, and which are someone else's. It would be nice, too, in cases like this one, if you'd also help us understand what words/message from you the emailer whose words you're quoting is responding to, so that we can more easily figure out what s/he means. Earler, as a member, I asked you to please stop making the readers work so hard. Now, as a moderator, I'm telling you to please stop making the moderators' job so time-consuming trying to figure out what you're saying/doing around here. Please start being very clear in your postings (not more clear than anyone else, mind you... I'm not asking you do to anything extraordinary) regarding who's who, what's what, and what your point is. Everyone else around here does it. You must, as well. Please. I'm not just asking anymore. Sometimes your stuff around here is so good. Seriously. When you're on your game, I love your posts... despite our prior problems. Please be conscientious. It'll be more fun for you, too, 'cause more people will want to read your stuff... and will give quality responses. Trust me on this one, okay? Please.

Finally, I hope you had Mr. Cheon's permission to post the contents of a private email from him to you. Or did he tell you you could go ahead and post it? Just checking. Remember that one always needs someone's permission in order to post said someone's private email (or chat room, or IM) communications in a public place like this.

So, anyway... back to the matter at hand: Please help us understand what all this means, okay? I, for one, am confused. What is Mr. Cheon saying... that he basically agrees with what's been written here and he's gonna' talk to his fellow alumni about it? Or... or, I dunno. What's he saying?

 

Gregg I communicated with John and sent him couple of emails.
Some with your suggestions without quoting you but in general words.
Also about fake site that copied the WCUAA web site catalogue from 1988 - 1989.

The remainder of alumni association - a number of ex graduates of WCU that reside in LA will be meeting to redesign the web site and address other problems the graduates share.

I posted here mostly because I sympathies with the grads and
don't think they should be having all the problems, remember the case pf the policeman who’s college was renamed or acquired by a larger university and because there was no longer web site the HR denied his candidacy for the job.

Well WCU graduates share that a site like this helps them with job applications, many HR professionals perform quick search read and find the info to be sufficient.

I trhink they should add the current status to the web site.
But i also state that theur degrees are 100% accredited and legitimate and its not the same as someone stated like ex CCU
unaccredited degree holder passes now as accredited.

John reply seems to be mostly about the Diploma mill that copied their web site info and distributes fake degrees from wCU.

I understand your coments about my posts and will improove with time.

Learner

 

Right, I understand that... and I sympathize, too. But my point is that the solution is not -- or should not be -- to create a web site that appears to be something it's not. They're doing, by your own admission, below, the very thing that I say they should not be doing...

Do you not see what you're saying they're doing here; and that they and you seem to be saying is okay? It's not okay! It's credibility by slight-of-hand. WCU is closed. The WCUAA.ORG folks are hoping that HR professionals doing a "quick search," as you call it, will perceive that WCU is open and currently operating so that there won't be so many pesky questions and/or so much explaining for them to do.

But that's a lie! It insults the intelligence of the very HR people they're trying to impress; and hangs a dark cloud of suspicion -- and not of their doing -- over those who legitimately graduated from WCU with accredited degrees!

I fear that you and/or John are not grasping exactly what I'm saying, here. Legitimate, regionally-accredited colleges sometimes close... or get bought, or get absorbed into something larger... or whatever. It happens. There's nothing anyone can do about it. And when it does happen, legitimate graduates from back when said school was operating need not (and most definitely should not) construct a faked appearance as a shorthand way of getting HR personnel to respect and honor their degrees.

A degree's accreditation status at the moment it is granted sticks with said degree no matter what subsequently happens to the school that granted it. This is terribly important to understand. Two hypothetical examples illustrate this:

1. [*]Before a regionally-accredited school becomes regionally-accredited (i.e., back when it was operating as an unaccredited school), any degrees it granted were, therefore, also unaccredited. Moreover, said degrees will always be unaccredited, even if the school subsequently becomes accredited and then starts issuing accredited degrees from that moment forward. A degree's status at the moment it is granted sticks with it, no matter what the accreditation status of the school which granted it subsequently becomes.
   
   [*]If a student starts-out at a school that's unaccredited, but then said school becomes accredited before said student completes his degree, then his degree, when it's finally granted, is accredited... even if that's not actually what he signed-up for back when the school was unaccredited. Moreover, his degree will always be accredited, even if said school subsequently either loses its accreditation or closes down altogether. A degree's status at the moment it is granted sticks with it, no matter what the accreditation status of the school which granted it subsequently becomes... even if it closes. Just because a school's accreditation status becomes downgraded (or even if it closes down altogether), the degrees it issued while it was still open and accredited will always be legitimate and also accredited.
   
   Said another way: An accredited degree stands on its own, and does not need the institution that granted it to even be in exisitence, much less still accredited, in order for said degree to still be useful and recognized.

The police officer you write about got screwed, to be sure. But he needn't have been. He probably could have avoided trouble by simply including in his application a note about the fact that his degree is regionally-accredited, even though the regionally-accredited institution which granted it no longer exists; and then he could have also included information about how his degree may be verified despite said closing. Or, if he did that and then still had the problem, then he could simply hire an attorney to write a letter to the hiring authority explaining how accreditation works, and asking said authority to reconsider the application in light of that new (to them at least) information.

In any case, however, the solution is not -- not ever -- to create the inaccurate, deceptive (and, therefore, highly suspicious to HR people) appearance that the now-closed WCU is still in operation. That's just not the way to do it!!!!! Such ends never justify such means.

Schools close. The accredited degrees said closed schools issued live on. The WCU alumni should erect a site that calls itself the official web site of the WCU alumni association. Said site should explain, right on its front page, that WCU is now closed (and when it closed); that it was regionally-accredited and, therefore, the degrees it issued were and remain accredited; that WCU's transcript files were transferred to wherever they were transferred to as the official guardian thereof; that said guardian is, itself, an accredited institution of higher learning and can, therefore, be trusted to administer said files; and that if anyone needs to verify a WCU graduate's degree, all s/he needs to do is contact said guardian institution; and, finally, that official transcripts may also be obtained from said guardian institution.

It's as simple as that! No deception or slight-of-hand is necessary. Doing so just raises red flags for HR personnel who are trying to figure out if a given job applicant's WCU degree -- and/or even the job applicant himself/herself -- is worth the powder it would take to blow it/him/her up!

Plus, this is a time bomb. If an HR person first buys the deception, but then later figures it out, s/he is unlikely to care that the deception, while bad, doesn't take anything away from the degree, which remains legitmate and credible and accredited, regardless. The deception on the web site is little different than lying on a job application... which is why I earlier characterized it as hanging a dark cloud over WCU grads.

Do you -- and/or John -- now understand what I'm saying, here? The deception/illusion/slight-of-hand approach is a huge mistake. Just HUGE!

While I grant you that it is not exactly the same, it is most certainly exactly that genre of deception... which is what I meant. And, I would add, completely unnecessary deception, too... for all the reasons I've stated above. Lying makes it worse... even if WCU grads feel like they're backed into a corner and have no other recourse. They do have other recourse: The truth... because the truth, in this case, doesn't actually hurt them. They just need to explain to, and educate, HR personnel... on their web site and; and/or on their resumes, and/or cover letters, etc.

See, Lerner... here's the thing...

You're arguing, on one hand, that what WCUAA is doing isn't improprietous because there are extraordinary circumstances, and people are getting screwed, etc. I understand all that. I sympathize. And I even understand the impulse of WCUAA folks to remedy the problem by the means they have chosen... even though it's a lie. After all, it's quicker and easier and most HR personnel won't know the difference. After all, the degrees are still legit/accredited, so at least that part's not a lie... right?

But I'm arguing, on the other hand, that what WCUAA is doing actually is improprietous... quite so; and that the extraordinary circumstances and screwings of WCU grads don't change that... no matter what. Moreover, I'm saying that even if what WCUAA is doing weren't actually improprietous (ostensibly because the degrees are, nevertheless, legit), then what it is doing has, at the very least, the appearance of impropriety.

In most situations where ethics are at issue, the mere appearance of impropriety is every bit as bad as actual impropriety. The mere appearance of impropriety is why, for example, a judge who knows he can be impartial when adjudicating a property dispute between a plaintiff whom he doesn't know, and a defendant whom he does, will recuse himself anyway... just to eliminate even the appearance of impropriety.

Lying is -- certainly in situations like this, at least... and, I would argue, probably in all situations -- indefensible. It's as simple as that. How ever WCU grads ultimately remedy their admittedly sad situation, they simply cannot employ the instrument of lying -- or even mere deception by casual appearances -- as a means of so doing. They just can't! It's wrong. Period.

And, worse, sooner or later it will blow-up in their faces... I promise.

If I were a WCU grad, that any of my fellow alums were doing this -- and by so doing, were hanging the cloud of deception and suspicion over me like this -- I'd be furious...

...and probably talking to a lawyer, as well.

 

This is why I posted here and sent to my frinds to post else were, I knew a good suggestions will come from members here.

I personally think their site is fine and all they need todo is a disclaimer that will make clear the status of the university.

I repeat about recomending disclaimer in my previus ccomments.
Not sure if you notticed that, but i also know that at times I come back and have hard time to understand my posts.
Basicly I don't recomend to lie , all I was speculationg is why the site the way it is today, for the reasons I stated before.

I think the degrees of WCU are accredited and fully legitimate and the site needs some changes.

 

Now if John will just take them.

Maybe you're so used to a government (in Russia) that so freely lies and misrepresents that your standards have become sub. In this country, we care about -- and strongly discourage -- things that are misleading. There is no reason in the world -- other than to intentionally deceive -- for John's web site to give the impression that WCU is still open, active and operating. A mere disclaimer is inadequate.

I noticed it just fine. The problem isn't that I didn't notice it; the problem is that I did... and it's inadequate.

But you're willing to tolerate -- or maybe even condone -- it... as long as there's a disclaimer.

Which reasons are indefensible. You're still not grasping it.

Yeah... like it needs to be demolished and a new one that is unambiguously an alum site for a now-closed university needs to be erected in its place.

 

Gregg they are posting on their site an old catalogue from 88 or 89
The first thing would be on any ones mind why the old catalogue?

Now the fake site they copied this catalogue and changed the dates to 2005. They missed abunch of things but their site is more real than this.

Now Gregg we must be leaving not in the same country, wile I understand your logic about government lies in Russia, whit all the respect does our government here always tells truth? And there is no deception anywhere?

The unions in your state are lieing about Govrnator Arnold, didn't
Davis lied about the electricity bills and issues and here in NY its not that better.

The reality is that people are being lied to all the time. All kind of products that grow hair, weight loss is what 10 billion industry now?
Yea, when oral sex is not sex, and when he didn't inhale
Come one.

I'm legal immigrant and citizen but you know that our immigration laws are not inforced because of cheap labor.
So legitimate graduates whit real degrees are fighting for recognition, and by the way no were on their site they state that the university is open for business and they are willing to listen and do the right thing, this is why I sent them your recommendations as example of how people can see such a thing.

You musy be very highly moral person, and to me this seems like over reaction, I don't see on their web site any direct deception, as ststed there in message we are open for business and the cataloge is from 89.
The initial perception changes after 5 minutsa brausing on the site.
Or one phone call to the new WCU.

Anyway your comments in general without name quoting were sent to John.

I'm very tired so didn't run spell check on this reply, no disrespect to all readers.
---

Another email from John to one of my friends.
Quote:

Dear Alumni,
We, all of us have suffered from the fact that WCU had been closed.
Now we are about to meet together and discuss about our problems.

Meeting location:

Holiday Inn Select
DIAMOND BAR
21725 E GATEWAY CENTER DR
DIAMOND BAR, CA

Direction by Google Map ( Click Here )
Time: 10:30 AM on 10/15/2005 (Saturday)
If you live in the great Los Angeles area, we strongly urge you to

 

I'm sorry you see things the way you do, Lerner...

...but hardly surprised. Your moral compass -- or lack thereof -- is clear for all to see.

Much is explained by this. Much.

 

Gregg its not an issue of my moral compas.
Ots an issue of how you understand my post, or how may posts understood because of my limited ability to express my self in english.

I do have simpaty to the graduates of WCU and the fact is they are willing to make cchanges and address the issues.
In case by case situation I make a compationet chice in favor for the graduates of WCU.

I stated in all my posts that if they add cclarificcation to their web site that the school is no longer in business it would make it more credible. The site in not intentionally built for deception.

Oncce I hear from a frind who is going to this meeting I will update the status and it is posible that they will adupt all of your recomendations.

learner

 

I don't know how much clearer your English would need to be for us to be able to understand "I personally think their site is fine and all they need todo is a disclaimer that will make clear the status of the university" any better than we already do.

And I stated in my posts that mere clarification and/or a disclaimer is not enough. You can't seem to grasp that.

Yes it is. Don't piss on my leg and then tell me it's raining.

Bet they don't. And if they don't, it would be cheap and easy to send an email to the registrar of every U.S. accredited college/university telling them about the web site and the deception it's obviously attempting; and warning them not to be fooled. Of course, in fairness, said email should also point out that just because some of WCU's alumni are stupid and deceitful, doesn't mean their degrees aren't still accredited and credible. All it means is that people with accredited and credible degrees can still be dishonest and dishonorable... which also rubs off on those who defend them, like it's rubbing off on you, right now.

 

I think that the reason they are getting together to talk about the problems and also to talk about making changes to their web site.

You make it sound like they are some kind of criminals and I say they are not.
Lets see how their new web site will look like.

You know even Abraham didn't tell the Pharaoh that Sarah was his wife but only his sister( yes she was half sister) so he didn't really lie but he didn't tell that she was his wife.

No one is pissing on your leg, you have tendency to suspect and over react.
Let’s not fight over this, OK.

In the age of internet, they WCU graduates should take full advantage of the technology, and I do think that disclaimer would be sufficient and they should fight back by using the web site’s

I found this to be more acceptable than state licensed but unaccredited law degrees; I wouldn’t hire one even if he is licensed.
As mentioned before no need making an elephant out of the fly

The second site is definatly atempting deception , but I don't think that this site is. And I understand your explanations but as i mentioned before no disrespect but you see deception in almost everything not that this is bad but this is a perception I get.

Learner

 

That's wonderful news. I hope they end-up doing the right thing. I'm just not holding my breath. I'd love to be wrong about this, however.

And I say you're right that they're not criminals... nor did I mean to suggest they were. But one needn't be criminal, per se, to be unethical or amoral... or simply misguided.

Yes, that's definitely the right approach, I'd say. As you suggest, let's just wait and see what happens.

A lie of omission is still a lie.

And how curious it is that you cite as justification that which is but a part of a much larger biblical passage (Genesis 20:1-18) which makes the point, clearly, that the very lie you cite had negative consequences on account of the person who was lied to having acted with integrity upon said lie; and his good faith (though clearly wrong) belief in its truth; and the imperative that that which came about as a result of the lie must be rectified.

The story of Abraham and Sarah and the whole wife/sister thing is oft cited -- and wrongly, I argue -- as justification for certain kinds of lies. Invariably, as with most misguided who isolate one part of biblical writing and cite it out-of-context to mean something it does, in context, not actually mean, a small part of the whole is foisted-off on the reader as indicative of a thing which it, taken as part of the whole from which it was isolated, is not.

One of the most egregious of these occurrences was in 1842, when Joseph Smith, the founder of the original Mormon church, published his Book of Abraham (which, in 1880, was adopted by the Utah branch of the Mormon church as scripture; and which later became part of The Pearl of Great Price, one of the Mormon church's four divinely inspired and authoritative source texts). In 1835, Smith had purchased several Egyptian papyrus scrolls and fragments from the owner of a traveling road show in Ohio which exhibited Egyptian mummies and documents. Smith's subsequent Book of Abraham was, he claimed, divinely inspired and not a writing of a new book of scripture but, instead, his having discovered and translated (from ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic text) an existing work that he claimed, on the title page of said book, were "[t]he writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand upon papyrus."

This translation would have been a neat trick, however, because, at the time, only a few academics could read ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic text... the translation of which only became possible following the discovery of the Rosetta Stone in 1799. By 1822, only those who had almost literally devoted their lives to figuring out how to decipher hieroglyphics (such as Jean François Champollion, 1790-1832, for example, who was often called the "father of the decipherment of hieroglyphs") were able to identify the names of only a few pharaohs on only some monuments. The ability to translate hieroglyphics, symbol-by-symbol, as Smith claimed he had done with his Book of Abraham papyri, came much later... and somewhat after Smith claimed to have completed said translation.

In 1859, French Egyptologist M. Theodule Deveria inspected the copies of the original images on the papyri and concluded that they were little more than typical Egyptian funerary documents. He was able to decipher the name of the priest who authored the work, as well as of a few Egyptian gods; and, in a French two-volume work in 1860 by Jules Remy entitled Voyage au Pays des Mormons, Deveria dismissed Smith's so-called "translation" as little more than "rambling nonsense". For more information, read By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus: A new look at the Joseph Smith Papyri by Mormon-turned-Evangelical-Christian Charles Lawson.

At any rate, by Smith's account in his book, God instructed Abraham to lie to the Egyptians by saying that his wife, Sarah, was his sister. Smith needed to be able to cite this cockeyed notion as evidence that God, himself, sometimes resorted to deception because, at the time, there was a dispute in the Mormon church as to whether it was acceptable to lie to the outside world by denying that polygyny was being practiced among the Mormons. Smith's point, like yours, missed -- or, perhaps more accurately, ignored -- the much larger point of the cited scripture that the lie itself had dire consequences; and that there was an absolute imperative that it all be rectified.

The insensible cherry-picking of passages, out of context, from scripture, in order to twist the Word into justification for nearly any evil is nothing new. I just wish it hadn't been tried here, too.

Res ipsa loquitur, Lerner. In this case, the thing speaks for itself. My suspicion and/or reaction is not required.

I actually thought I was doing a pretty good job of not letting it get to that. I feel like we're having a pretty interesting little debate, here... but maybe that's just me. I agree with you, however, that we shouldn't "fight" about it... and if I'm doing that, I apologize. I just take truth-telling and integrity painfully seriously; and have trouble getting my mind wrapped around the notions of those who espouse the acceptability of that which misleads

To deceive, you mean? The Internet makes it easier to pull a fast one and, therefore, WCU graduates should avail themselves of that to its fullest capability? That can't be what you're saying... is it?

I do agree that the very nature of the Internet might mean that new tactics which exploit the technology to rectify, in the very same way that that same technology was used to harm in the first place, might be in order. However, the means should never be deceptive, no matter what.

And I've made it clear that I don't. You have your opinion, and I have mine... which is as it should be.

Agreed. But not by misleading anyone... either by omission or commission.

I'm not sure I see the connection of that to this debate... other than you know that I support California's making it possible for anyone to be an attorney who wishes to do so by making non-ABA-approved law programs available -- even via distance learning -- that will qualify one to sit for California's bar exam (arguably the toughest bar exam in the nation), and you just want to take a swipe at that. If you had some other intention, please share.

And that would certainly be your prerogative. Lots of people make silly decisions based on incorrect and/or unfounded assumptions. I would defend to my death your right to do so, as well.

So, then... what? Small lies are okay? And, by the way... if your answer is "yes," it would be hard for me to argue that since I think everyone alive has told "little white lies" for the greater good of something. Maybe you're saying that we should categorize WCU's as merely that. I dunno. If so, then it's certainly something to think about.

If you mean the Chinese one, yes, you're right. But that site's not the subject of this thread.

That's your opinion, and you've the right to express it... as I have the right to express the opinion that you're wrong, and that it is.

And I yours.

And even an uncareful reading of my body of posts here would quickly show that that is a misperception on your part.

And you're entitled to any misperceptions, and opinions, you wish.

Whatsay we wait, as you suggested, and see what the WCU alums do. Then we can resume this discussion, eh?

So far, this has been fun, Lerner. I'm serious. Thank you.

 

Sounds good.

Now I revisited the web site and looked at it in a new way.
If I never knew about WCU closure in 97-98 I would think that
this is a site of school that is active. Once I started reading the pages and links then it was obvious old info from late 80's.

In it current form the site is misleading, most likely intentionally
to help its member alimini.

Another big problem they face is all the fake - replications of closed college diplomas sold over the years.
My suspicion is that some are fake graduates who use the fake diplomas or even not fake diplomas, simply lie on their resumes
by claiming WCU degrees, in one earlier email's to me in 2000 I learned that the records are 80% complete and there were genuane graduates whos records were lost. So there is more to this. My friend comunicated with current active WCU and wass asured that all the records are avalble and that over the years
they had inqueries about people whos records they can't locate because they never realy atended WCU.

It is posible that some one is investigating this and even had a
visit to the meeting. based on gossip and sts made in 2004 in Bufalo, NY. one suspect of the business raded by FBI had fake WCU degree. I have no more credible info, its more like a husband of friends sister got arested etc.

As far as disclaimer, it maybe not sufficient i notticed some mills like BSU having disclaimer about recognition of their accreditor and then full page of how credible their accreditor with name very similar to Central States RA agency, so I can see how even with disclamer the site stil can be seen as deception.

But some for HR person - well thats all they need in many ocations. As far as real schools they demand sealed transcripts sent by university etc.