Why Berne?

Veritas,

Michael

 

Re: Re: Re: All talk, not substance.

Your comments are especially amusing considering that I am sure I have had a much greater number of conversations with Chilean Ministry of Education officials than you have. In fact, I talked to one just a few weeks ago. You?

As a historical note*, the thread in which I proved that your Titulo Técnico is not the equivalent of an Associates degree can be found here. Reread it and refresh your memory about what numerous officials at the Chilean Ministry of Education had to say about your alma mater. Bottom line: the school you claim awarded you a degree was never authorized to do so. Unlike your asseverations, the information I posted can be corroborated because I listed the names and contact numbers of the individuals with whom I spoke. Just for fun, count the number of times that you, although you claim an intimate knowledge of Chilean educational matters, misspelled the names and misunderstood the function of degrees, schools, titles, organizations, and governmental departments.

Have or haven’t what? Could you please make a greater effort to be coherent?

I’m still not clear as to your purpose in posting (aside from the fact you join in anytime you think another forum member is attacking me). Is it your assertion that the AMP from Harvard is an academic degree? My only comment in relation to Harvard is that it isn’t; it is, at best, executive training. Are you disagreeing with me and using your Harvard experience (whatever that may be) to bolster your contention? Your point (aside from attacking me) certainly isn’t clear from your posts.

You are correct; I don’t mention my credentials. Therefore, your belief that they are second rate is mere speculation on your part. I also understand why you would believe my Web site is second rate, as I do not list any of your alma maters. However, please understand, this is not done as a personal affront to you; it’s just that I refuse to list any fictitious schools and degree mills.

I have no idea why you believe this thread is about you (or even me). I do know that many individuals, unable to formulate coherent arguments of their own (perhaps their education should not have consisted solely of open book, multiple-choice examinations), choose instead to personalize the conversation and resort to ad hominem attacks.

Wow! You make it sound that I am the one who claims credentials from non-existent schools and degree mills! Michael, you have proven yourself untruthful; as far as I am concerned, everything you post is suspect.


*Broderick’s claims are historically significant because, if true, it means that California Coast University simply took his word that he held a legitimate Associates degree, and, without proper due diligence or any verification whatsoever, awarded him full academic credit for a fictitious degree.

 

Re: Re: Re: All talk, not substance.

But you have, and they are. (Second-rate, that is.)

 

Bill Dayson's reply

Bill,

That was one of the most thoughtful, well written and respectful replies that I have seen. I agree with you. The guy served his country and rose to a position of executive leadership and probably just had a lifelong dream of pursuing his Doctorate.

Who knows why or how he chose Berne. If he has esteemed friends and academics that allow him to teach and mentor to a new generation then that is to be admired, not put down. I would not crucify the guy either. We need more lifelong learners and mentors. I never even KNEW , or cared about, the academic qualifications of many of my most cherished and experienced professors. They may have had great qualifications but the point is I never knew or cared.

Gus comes off as an arrogant jerk, whatever his qualifications might be. I may be nobody to Gus and I certainly have done done nothing spectacular that would cause him to see me as anything special but he has shown me nothing but contempt, arrogance and a willingness to insult people that do not measure up to his "standards " at every opportunity. ( even an old WW 2 veteran who probably has earned more respect from more people in his lifetime than Gus ever will )

With that I sign off adding ( to spite Gus ) , AMP, The Wharton School, University of Penn, 2002 to my titles. Yes, a corporate sponsored $25,000 program where I learned management, investment and leadership strategy from the likes of Jeremy Siegel, Michael Useem and others who wrote the " Books " on the stock market and leadership.

 

Re: Bill Dayson's reply

Hi Lajazz

I am unclear of your point. Are you saying IF a poster is arrogant or insulting, that makes his viewpoint or facts untrue? Wouldn't it be more effective to post evidence his points are untrue than attack his personality?

 

Re: Bill Dayson's reply

That’s interesting, Rafael, I arrived at the same assessment as Bill before I ever posted to this thread. Did anything I post go contrary to Bill’s assessment?

I believe you are distorting the issue. Dr. Wetsch, who lives in North Carolina, posed some observations and questions concerning a school’s (also in NC) hiring decision, a faculty member’s credentials, and the unique (for the school in question) manner in which the faculty member earned his doctorate. All of these are legitimate subjects for discussion on this forum, especially since the questionable school that awarded the doctorate has been discussed many times in the past. No one is debating the individual’s business experience, or service to his country, nor does that give him a pass in regards to the issues being discussed.

Thank you, Rafael, but you obviously have mistaken me for someone who cares about your (unsubstantiated) opinions. You have clearly stated, more than once, that much of what you post is specifically designed to raise my ire. Personally, I don’t mind, but you have to understand that these kinds of comments severely undermine your credibility.

In regards to you personally, Rafael, all I ever did was to call you a fool for proclaiming that you would get a degree mill credential just to spite some members of this forum and insisting that you were sincere about doing so. In regards to the gentleman in question, I simply pointed out that the AMP was not a Master’s degree, and to list it as such was deceptive. I’ve been subjected to all kinds of spurious personal accusations since having made that (and only that) statement, but no one has refuted it. For you to twist my words and portray them as some kind of attack on “an old WW 2 veteran” is really low, Rafael, even for you.

To spite me? How unbecoming, Rafael. By definition, to spite someone means that you are attempting to fulfill a need to see others suffer. Therefore, also by definition and in light of all the accusations you have spewed my way, you are guilty of hypocrisy.

I have the highest respect for your credentials, Rafael, and I challenge you to point out any instance of me having posted words to the contrary. If, however (I noticed you employed the term “title”), you were to list your AMP as if it were a graduate degree, then I would, once again, make the observation that it is not, and listing it as such is deceptive.

 

POP QUIZ!

An arrogant jerk is someone who

• agrees with me and with whom I never argue.
• is an ignorant fool whom I easily best in every debate.
• I consistently disagree with, but try as I might, I can never prove wrong.
• I don’t care about the definition; I just enjoy hurling epithets any chance I get.[/list=a]
  
  

 

Re: POP QUIZ!

• 
  
  e. someone with no disclosed qualifications who severely criticizes everyone elses.
  
  
  I'm sorry thats not a solution to the arrogant jerk question, its an answer to the arrogant ass question.

 

Re: Re: POP QUIZ!

Oh, but it is; reread answer "d."

 

Ag shame. My father is a WWII veteran and he doesn't go around listing VFW after his name, hoping people will think it's some weird graduate degree from Belgium or someplace like that. He hasn't bought a vanity doctorate from Bernie's, either.

 

Re: Re: POP QUIZ!

I was unaware that posting qualifications supports or undermines an unrelated position or point. This seems like an ad hominem attack. If a person disagrees with Gus, but can't find any reason for that belief, wouldn't it be wise to reexamine that belief?

 

Re: Re: Re: POP QUIZ!

It only matters when someone uses his/her own degrees/qualifications/experiences/etc. as support for his/her argument. I don't recall Gus doing this to any great extent. He's stated before that his degree or degrees is/are from accredited schools, but he hasn't drawn on those experiences to prove points.

But when Mike accuses Gus of having "second-rate" credentials--utter speculation, of course--then Mike's come into question. And I believe, IIRC, he holds at least one degree from CCU. 'Nuff said.

 

Back on the Berne question -- I think that the RA school is lucky to have the gentleman. They probably would have brought him onboard without the doctorate. However, the Berne credential does diminish him as an academician even though he is a distinguished executive.

In trying to draw a comparison I am aware of a North Carolina College where I do some adjunct teaching where we had an excellent IT instructor who had considerable experience including a long distinguished career in IT with IBM. His Ph.D. and academic background were in physics. After the SACs accreditation review he was unable to teach any IT courses because he did not have the academic qualifications in CIS or a related discipline. This seems unfair to me especially due to his experience and all RA credentials. Nonetheless, SACS spoke and this event happened. Because of the SACS evaluation there were specific lines drawn regarding academic background and what courses we teach regardless of job experience. The terminal degree and 18 grad. hrs. in a discipline were strictly applied.

Based on this experience I am not able to reconcile SACS rules against a Berne degree or how to determine how much graduate credit is an AMP worth? In addition, I have sat on academic boards where folks have all levels of academic backgrounds (no degree to doctorate) and very successful in business and many with distinguished military careers. None of these folks I know have diluted their exisiting credentials with an unrecognized credential.

My 2 cents -- I would like to see our Berne gentleman just drop the degree.

John

 

Re: Re: Re: POP QUIZ!

Was I attacking someone? Whom would the shoe fit? Perhaps you can help me.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: All talk, not substance.

Speculation and ignorance on your part.

Not true. I'll let others on the forum be the judge.

Easy, you stated that the HBS program was nothing more than nine week training. You are wrong, you have never attended Harvard, and based on your shilling and (non disclosed so proper assumption substandard) credentials, you probably never will.

You dont list anything, I am upfront about everything. Sadly, it only shows your true colors (yellow).

It is not about you or me, I just dont want other forum readers to be misguided by your subjective half-truths.

You don't show anything! Talk about suspect. At least Dr. Douglas was, and is, man enough to list all of his exploits, good or bad. And sorry, no non existent schools or degree mills here. Maybe your the one with them. Hey! Maybe you havent got any education. Possibly a GED, but that is it. If not, prove otherwise.

You can say all you want, but I think by the other posts here, the forum members know what's up.
Gus, don't you get tired of the abuse? Getting publicly smacked around can't be fun. Isn't what is said about you on AED enough?

Veritas,

Michael

P.S. Bring it on! I got more of this where it came from!

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: POP QUIZ!

I stand by my post and reiterate the most important part that you dropped. "If a person disagrees with Gus, but can't find any reason for that belief, wouldn't it be wise to reexamine that belief?"

 

Re: Knock one down, another one takes its place...

Interesting. You are implying that you have had more contact with officials of the Chilean Ministry of Education than I have. Why don’t you list the names of the individuals in question and their telephone numbers as I have? The answer is simple: you can’t, because you haven’t. It seems that I am not as ignorant or speculative as you would like everyone to believe.

Which is it? Are you insisting it isn’t true, or will you allow everyone to reach his or her own judgment? For the record, I posted the link to the thread, not you.

Once again, you resort to personal attacks without refuting anything I say. Here’s what Harvard had to say about the duration of their executive training programs:

• “Throughout the year, HBS offers more than 45 specialized Executive Education programs. Ranging in length from 2 days to 9 weeks, these programs challenge participants to think differently in order to improve their organization's performance.”

There it is in black and white: the longest program they offer is nine weeks. Is it your contention that because you attended Harvard in some capacity, your opinion carries more weight than Harvard’s own Web site describing the duration of their programs?

Moreover, as to the executive programs (such as the AMP) being an academic credential, here’s what they had to say (see here):

• “Executive Education offers only non-degree programs. Certificates are awarded to participants upon completion of the program.

Although you claim that my comments are not truthful, why am I not surprised that what is stated on Harvard's Web site supports what I said?

Is this what you meant earlier when you referred to “muscle tactics?” If so, I’ve never stooped so low as to employ them. Bottom line: the Chilean Ministry of Education is on record stating the school that awarded you a Titulo Técnico was never authorized to do so (full story here). Moreover, fully half of the academic credits required for the next degree you earned (from CCU) were fulfilled by this fictitious degree. Being that all of this has already been proven (mostly by your own admissions), to deny it now means that you are anything but “upfront.”

You call them half-truths, yet you are still unable to refute them. Could you imagine how much more difficult they would be to refute if my statements were 5/8 true or 3/4 true? What would it take for you to prove what I say is untrue? 1/100 truth? 1/1000 truth? 1/1,000,000 truth?

You don’t get it, do you? Respectfully refusing to disclose information is not the same thing as making false claims. Not even close. I’ll let Rich address the issue of how much grief he has suffered at the hands of individuals like you, who do not address the ideas exposed or refute arguments, but choose instead to resort to ad hominem attacks. Nobody, but nobody, gave Rich a harder time about some of his past choices than I did. The entire time, however, I only commented on the actual decisions and statements he made and refrained from posting anything that was not a provable fact (as is my wont). That is why today we are able to converse civilly and amiably, and have a great deal of respect for each other. In fact, if you dig through the archives, you will find that I was the first to suggest he return to Union.

Wow! Suppose, just for a moment, that what you say is true. Wouldn’t that make the fact that you can’t refute anything I say even more embarrassing?

By the way, don’t forget that we are all still waiting for you to post the SENCE number of your school in Chile. You know, the one that can’t be located; the one that closed and is no longer in business (according to an email you professed to have received from an unnamed Chilean official, who just happened to write in a non-Chilean Spanish dialect); the one that the only student ever to profess having graduated from there (you) couldn’t actually name the school correctly; the one for which no evidence exists (according to an extensive Internet search) that anyone ever graduated from there; the one the Chilean Ministry of Education stated never existed and was never authorized to confer degrees; the one that is so elusive that you posted numerous links that you claimed were evidence of its existence, yet none of them were the institution you claimed it to be ; the one…

They do indeed. Your attempts at rewriting history notwithstanding, don’t judge all the members of DegreeInfo by the minute few (such as yourself) that choose to chime in every time they think a frenzied personal attack might make an acceptable substitution for a logical refutation of my arguments.

You keep making these kinds of comments as if you have refuted any of my arguments—you haven’t. Once again, if what I say is, as you have stated, only half true, why can’t you say which half is true and which half is false. You fancy yourself good at trash talking, Broderick, but it’s only that—trash talk.

It is very revealing that you identify so closely with the comments of the individual currently posting on AED as Roy Tumak. In the future, I will accord you the same respect as I do his posts. As to the abuse, it seems like I’m in very good company, and Dr. Bear explained the only proper and logical way to deal with the situation much more eloquently than I could.

This is a matter of grave concern. If what you say is true, my suggestion is that you call a professional and your have septic tank drained.

 

I asked Harvard AMP Program

Here's the reply:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr. Crisantes,

In reference to your message concerning the AMP designation, typically AMP graduates would refer to it in a resume but not in the title as it is a non degree program.

Hope that is helpful and let me know if you need any additional information.

Regards,
Kathryn Venne
-----------------------------------
I asked:

Hello, I was just wondering if it was appropriate to have the "AMP" designation in one's title?

e.g. John Doe Phd AMP Or Dr. John Doe, AMP

Thanks,

Bob Crisantes

-------------------------------------