"DegreeInfo.com" now a dirty word at CollegeHints.com

It is now impossible to mention DegreeInfo.com at CollegeHints.com. Refereces to DegreeInfo.com are automatically ***'d out when posts are submitted.

 

Take a cue from the spammers and spell it as d'greeinfo.com. If that works then maybe you can sell some Viagra.

 

Well, I just joined Gus and got banned. I think it was because I posted a defense of Gus. I also countered some Knightsbridge nonsense after a tip from Gus. Too funny.

The place is a degree mill factory. If you say anything about it, James Crabb (of "k5fk" fame around here) trashes you with inane comments, then "Dr." Hayes and "Dr." Marianus jump in with a host of distortions. Finally, the guy running Knightsbridge has been brought back full-force. It is to laugh.

Funny thing, I told Gus today I was going to quit posting there. It seemed so pointless; like nailing Jello to the wall. Or like a.e.d.

 

That's all too funny! Both that Rich is now banned and that CollegeHints added the word "DegreeInfo" to the board's list of banned profane words!

 

Can we say personal vendetta's?


Oh well, Either George or myself are next.......

 

I certainly hope not. I aim to keep it civil and above board. I respect the views of all individuals, and they have a right to view them. I freely admit that I would not touch an unaccredited degree with a barge pole, but hey, that is my position. I come from a system where unaccredited degrees do not exist - and if they do arise, then they are frowned upon. However, as an academic, and a true 'seeker of truth', I am open to all arguments.
Someone has an unaccredited degree, but has significantly contributed to a body of knowledge - how should they be treated? Differently? Mmmm. Hey, if I had the answer, both degreeinfo and collegehints would have been closed down yonks ago. I am still fascinated by the legal conferral issue, and look forward to the discourse (or flaming, which ever comes first).

Cheers,

George

 

No offense Michael, but I don't think they engage in cannibalism.

thread

Tony

 

Not until they finish waying their options.

 

Perhaps some people are observing a different collegehints site than the one I am seeing. Degreeinfo is definitely **********. I have never seen anyone recommend a poor school without several people giving the usual warnings. These warnings are less agressive than the ones seen around here.

To anyone there, it is obvious why Rich and Gus should have been banned. They lead a few day long crusade with many agressive posts challenging everyone and everything on the site.

To me it seemed to be a dare as to who would get booted first. Gus obviously won the prize. I would recommend the site to anyone who wants discussion without the agressive rhetoric.

 

It had nothing to do with rhetorical style. There was no violation of the TOS. James Crabb and Neil Hayes dished it out pretty good, too.

The reason we were banned is we wouldn't let their degree mill shilling and unsubstatiated falsehoods go unchallenged. That threatened their agenda (the moderators and the ones connected to diploma mills), so we got the boot.

Glen, the owner, acknowledged that he was going to take degree mill advertising money, and wasn't going to stop. That tells you everything right there. The fact that people like Marianus and Hayes were given free reign, that James Crabb was free to say anything he wanted, simply supported that agenda.

If you want to defend this kind of stuff, fine. It's nothing less than I'd expect.

It does seem strange, however, to see Dennis talking about someone else's "aggressive rhetoric."

 

I don't understand the passion with which some people seem to hate Rich. Perhaps I haven't been paying attention...

 

I like James - we know who he doesn't like.

"nothing less than I would expect" To quote yourself "TOS, TOS, TOS"

Agressive rhetoric - ME ??? Rhetoric is something someone else uses, I use good common sense.

 

I agree. Only that what you call “less aggressive warnings” most intelligent people would call tacit approval or promotion.

Really? Since neither of us violated the Terms and Conditions for Use of This Website posted on CollegeHints, and you seem to have some kind of insider status there, why don’t you give a clear explanation of why Rich and I where banned? Can you explain why the entire thread where Glen explains that he will ban anyone for any reason any time he chooses (the only other message in the thread being the post in which Rich protested my banning) has been deleted? It certainly seems like puerile behavior to me. Can you explain why my signature file (which included a link to my Website has been removed from all of my posts? Can you explain why the link to my homepage (Distance Learning Business Degrees) has been altered to take you to a nonexistent Website (the “s” in “degrees” in the url was removed)? These actions are not just childish or an attempt to remove a disruptive poster; these actions demonstrate a clear and concerted effort to discredit anyone who is a critic of substandard schools and/or degree mills. And, just in case they choose to deny it at CollegeHints, you might want to let them know that I had the foresight to make copies of all relevant Websites before they were altered or had threads and posts removed.

That’s bullshit Dennis, and you know it. Let me repeat it so it is clear: BULLSHIT!!!

What we do know is that there is a pattern of silencing anyone who exposes the lies and distortions of those promoting substandard schools (not surprisingly as Glen has admitted they support and finance the site). We also know that you were one of the leaders of a concerted effort to make it seem like Rich and I were disrupting the forum by repeatedly posting the same childish, obnoxious, rude, and provoking message any time he or I would post anything. Moreover, as the actions of you and your cohorts were clear violations of the TOS, and none of you would’ve risked being banned from your precious haven, it is obvious you had the approval and protection of the owner and the forum’s anonymous moderator to do so.

I agree, both Rich and I, regardless of the substance of our posts, were marked from the outset to be banned. This is no secret and was actually publicly called for by several individuals, and even accompanied by threats if it was not done. As I explained to another member in a private message, it could not be done simultaneously as it would have seemed too obvious the forum aimed to silence any critic of degree mills and/or substandard schools.

On CollegeHints you wrote, “Certain individuals who have previously posted here were more interested in debating points than providing useful information.” That’s an interesting observation, especially considering that I am certain that I can point to a single day in which either Rich or I have provided more factual information concerning distance education than you have posted in your entire life on all forums combined.

It’s obvious why you would recommend the site, Dennis. You have advocated unethical behavior in the past; it seems like you have found a home. However, as you yourself wrote about CollegeHints here on this forum, “The degree mill guys seem to own the place.”

That CollegeHints promotes and derives income form substandard schools and degree mills without regard to the ethical implications is a fact. What I don’t understand is why the legitimate schools that advertise on that forum and the corporate clients of Glen VanWormer’s (noted multilevel marketer, alleged spammer, and CollegeHints owner) job placement service and HR enterprise (www.4jobs.com ) tolerate this kind of behavior. Could it be they simply don’t know about it?

 

That's generally true. However, now most of the people who posted those "usual warnings" have been banned.

I think that most current posters on Collegehints believe (or claim to believe) that DETC is at least equal to, if not superior to, RA in every aspect, and that all unaccredited schools should be considered legitimate until there is absolute definitive proof otherwise.

They will give "warnings" about degree mills and then turn around and defend schools like St. Regis and Trinity C&U.

Anyone who disagrees with them is an academic fraud, regardless of the legitimacy of that peron's statements and/or credentials.

Collegehints has not yet degenerated into the mill shill chaos of A.E.D., but given the nature of their content, as well as their recent bannings/unbannings, they certainly seem to be headed in that direction.

 

I don't know if you were marked from the outset. There were definitely several people who because of past history would want to see you and Rich gone. They won.

I recommend the site but will still spend lots ot time here. My old friends Rich and Gus are here.

Advocated unethical behavior?? I think this takes a leap in logic.

I have been warned a couple times on CollegeHints for comments concerning schools. I just dressed down a bit to match the decor.

If your principles say that if you cannot make your true feelings known, you wouldn't want to be there anyway, then you won. They can suffer without you.

 

I'm vaguely proud of the fact that I was one of the first individuals banned over there. Though to this day I don't have any idea why. I don't read that board any longer and have little interest in it.

My feeling is that Degreeinfo should set its own course and let Collegehints complain about it, we shouldn't waste time talking about them.

 

Gus Sainz writes:

> Since neither of us violated the Terms and Conditions for
> Use of This Website posted on CollegeHints, and you seem to
> have some kind of insider status there, why don’t you give a
> clear explanation of why Rich and I where banned?

Gus posted the same message a large number of times (the entire text of the message being "Would you consider this an example of what our new moderator meant when he stated, 'Please ensure you take the time to treat all fellow members here at Collegehints with respect and courtesy?'", or trivial variations thereon). People come to forums for information. Posting the same message repeatedly, regardless of content, decreases the signal-to-noise ratio, and is not good behavior in any forum (even if part of a tit-for-tat).

I don't think Glen's behavior can be entirely explained with a "rational but evil" model. Some of his acts, such as forbidding people for a while to name any specific school, were not rational.

 

I agree, just like I said on the other board, if we ignore them they will go away..... Of course at the time I meant Rich, though never in a bad way. I just figired if they didn't react to him he would grow bored of them and move on.

 

I would agree, Bill, IF it were simply another forum. Unfortunately, unlike many other forums whose denizens freely express all kinds of cockamamie viewpoints and ideas, it seems as if the ownership of CollegeHints has a clear business plan to profit from promoting substandard schools and degree mills. As such, CollegeHints merits watching and its activities exposed.

I do agree, however, that the most of the messages posted by the more prolific posters of that forum are only relevant only in the context that they are helping (willingly or unwillingly) CollegeHints implement its business plan. Some of the members are degree mill owners, others degree mill credential holders and promoters; but the vast majority are simply clueless dupes (many of whom have been discredited on, or banned from DegreeInfo) subscribing to the theory that the enemies of my enemies are my friends. Those with a sincere belief in legitimate non-tradional education (such as nationally accredited schools) don't understand the damage they are doing to their cause. A small minority actually mistakenly believes (as I did) that they might be able to counter some of the misinformation and provide an alternate viewpoint, but in trying to avoid being banned, they tread so lightly as to be ineffective.

In any event, CollegeHints clearly merits monitoring as much as any bogus accreditor, degree mill, or related front. Now that the goals and methodology (questioning or correcting misinformation simply won’t be allowed) of the ownership has been exposed, it is obvious that it behooves anyone that truly cares about the quality and legitimacy of education and credentials to refrain from posting on that forum. Let the integrity, eloquence and intelligence of the messages posted on that forum be the cause of its demise.

 

Mark, for some inexplicable reason, your characterization of the tone and substance of my posts on ColegeHints is highly inaccurate. You neglected to point out that my messages were only in response to the repeated postings of the same inane drivel (with quotes), and that they were clearly and explicitly protesting the rude and obnoxious behavior and the effect it had on the signal-to noise ratio. You are now attempting to accuse me of the precise behavior to which I was objecting. Moreover, the posts made repeated calls to the moderators to put an end to such puerile and disruptive behavior (of which Dennis Ruhl was a major instigator and perpetrator).

I agree. Glen’s behavior can be explained as irrationally greedy and unethical. Oh, and by the way, the specific naming of a school is still forbidden by the CollegeHints’ TOS. You know, the one that, apparently, only I have read.