Rod Kirkland attacking DI and Dr. Bear

In a previous post I asked why Rod attacks DI while remaining a contributor. His response was he hadn't attacked but offered suggested improvements. I let the untrue response slide since I have been working 6-7 days a week. Now Rod is back with the attacks.

"I have to agree with the above comments. I don't know what Bear (Klempner) believes in these days. He started and ran unaccredited schools. He never founded an accredited school. That isn't a bad thing (as his quote demonstrates) but then he turns around and betrays his own efforts and alumni claiming those degrees are problematic. He pushes his concept of Generally Accepted Accrediting Principles, but none of his schools met those standards. He sold "honorary" doctorate diplomas supposedly as a joke, but like the mills, made a lot of money at it. He's become a public figure through his books about education, yet he isn't a trained educator (I believe his doctorate is in communications and his student project/dissertation was about people who 'write in" their opinions.) He encourages his colleagues to label others shills yet he appears to be one of the biggest shills in the business, modifying his message to suit his revenue stream based on varying business interests. It's all very dysfunctional. He seems to be propped up and used to promote a number of different agendas, depending on who's footing the bill. I don't trust people like that or their advice. "

http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=609377&CategoryID=366456&startcat=1&ThreadID=2258617

While "Jamesville" is by its very nature ugly, this kind of hurtful name calling by a DI member is totally unacceptable. I believe Rod owes both DI and Dr. Bear an apology.

 

Is there a reason why we should care what they are saying over there?

 

Probably not. No offense to Dr. Bear but this crud has been put out for 30 years and will be put out for years to come so there is probably no reason to get excercised over it.

 

Kirkland has engaged in the same behavior here, as I've experienced first-hand.

Rod has a chip on his shoulder because of criticisms of CCU.

 

Yup. He also has a chip on his shoulder because of people defending CCU (that would be me) whilst (sorry, couldn't resist) criticising certain CCU students for lying about the accreditation status of their degrees. Why should we care? Simply so that no one is fooled by polite behaviour here which is only the front for viciousness elsewhere. The same two-faced game is now being played by Lawrie Miller. Sigh.

 

Decimon:
No offense to Dr. Bear but this crud has been put out for 30 years and will be put out for years to come so there is probably no reason to get excercised over it.

John:
Perhaps. Yet I do. Perhaps a character flaw. I find there is, for me, real merit in the "out of sight, out of mind" approach. I know that there are children dying on the streets of [insert your favorite outrage here]. But I think of those things very rarely, typically when writing a decent-sized check to the wonderful Seva organization (www.seva.org). If I thought of it constantly, I'd probably go nuts(er).

And I know that dysfunctional humans are writing untrue and very nasty things about me, as they have since 1973. But for me, there is a very big difference between knowing that, and actually having the information (content, reference, or URL) waved in my face, as it were.

That is why I packed up and left DegreeInformation earlier this year. And that is why I grow restive when regular references (or especially, as just happened, lengthy quotes) are posted here.

Of course I do not expect people to 'protect' me here. I am fully capable of doing the 'out of sight, out of mind' thing by looking elsewhere. No one is forcing me to participate. Can spend all day watching my new all-time-favorite silly thing on the internet:
http://crass.on.ru/flash/pingpong.html

John Bear

 

Or just character.

I many years ago purchased one of your Guides. I very much liked how you demystified the whole college thing in the course of presenting distance learning options.

Then I discovered the internet and your detractors. Aside from the "accusation" of your being of a particular religious background, I considered the charges against you. I saw that you'd addressed each claim openly and without reservation. I saw nothing condemning in your past activities.

Sorry to hear that the accusations still vex but I don't imagine there is anything to be done about that.

At any rate, you have far fewer detractors than Bill Gates and there is no sign that any amount of criticism deters him.

 

"Particular religious background"?

You're not a...well...a...that is...you're not a ...LUTHERAN are you?

(gasp!)

(Sorry, Uncle!)

 

Yeah. What could someone be appealing to when offering that as some damning revelation?

We thought of the same alternate revelation.

"Janko? You know what he is, don't you?"

 

Hey, hey, hey!

And Kennedy-Western, too, as I recall.

It's worthy of note that some have privately communicated with me their belief that if a person posts here, obviously pretending to be something s/he's not as evidenced by their terrible posts elsewhere, then they should be booted outta' here. I'm not proposing it, or saying I even agree. As the liberal, free-speech nut, nearly-lifelong-ACLU-member that I am, that would be a tough one to swallow under almost any circumstances. But I'm just pointing out that more than just a few people around here appear to share the basic belief that if someone's gonna' pretend here, and trash people here elsewhere, then they should be left with said "elsewhere" as their only place to spew.

But, you now, everyone... we're doin' it again. If we just ignore them, we'll make them impotent. I keep preachin' it and preachin' it. My mother was right about this, you know. There's only one way to treat bullies and taunters, and that's to act is if they don't even exist.

Easier said, than done.. I realize. But it's worth a try, it seems to me.

 

I agree with DesElms. On the other hand, I consider it completely reasonable for me to conclude that a certain person is a morally bankrupt individual based on what they've posted elsewhere even though their posts here do not indicate such a severe lack of character.

 

I'm sorry; are we still talking about Lutherans?

 

Ha! Now that's funny!

So do I.

 

OK, now what...

Yes? So what do you kids have to say for yourselves??? Not one of you guys addressed the issues or refuted the facts as I presented them, just a bunch of ad hominems. So, here's your chance... please John, feel free to speak up at any time, since this concerns you. I will speak with Lutherans too...

here's the link to the current thread elsewhere
http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=609377&CategoryID=366456&ThreadID=2258617

 

Kirkland:
[P]lease John, feel free to speak up at any time, since this concerns you.

Bear:
Speak up on exactly what? Ask me specific questions, and I will answer every one of them.

--John Bear ([email protected]),
who has served as an expert witness
in California Superior Court, on behalf of a CCU
graduate whose degree had not been accepted.

 

Re: OK, now what...

Well, I'm no kid and I would like to hear why you keep bringing up the name of Klempner. What is your purpose in that?

 

Re: Re: OK, now what...

His name was Andrew Klempner. I like it better than Bear, sounds too zoological.

 

lo peor...........................

The worst thing to do in these situations is to close the thread or re-write the TOS.

The merits of: EACH shall endure scrutiny.

 

Re: Re: Re: OK, now what...

And Bob Dylan was Robert Zimmerman but that doesn't answer the question. You must have some purpose to your mantra.

 

Thanks, let's start with these. I've stated the facts (as I understand them to be) in the above mentioned thread....

Are any untrue? If yes, which ones?

Were you the founder or have business interests in:
Millard Fillmore
International Institute for Applied Studies
Greenwich
CPU
Fairfax
London Institute for Applied Research

Did any of these schools meet the GAAP criteria you describe?

Did any of these schools or operations become accredited?

It is reported you made over $50,000 selling "honorary" doctorate diplomas. Is this true?

Were any of the educational names you created or were affiliated with not licensed or approved as educational entities?

Do you have any formal training in education?

Did you relocate one of your schools to Hawaii? Isn't this one of the no-no's in your book and an indication of a mill (departing a state in which the school operates then moving to a state with virtually no standards)?

Did you ever recommend KWU as a good school in one of your books? What is your position on that school now?

What is your position on non-traditional, state-licensed, state-approved schools and degrees now?

Did you recently say in an interview that a degree from one of your schools was now "problematic"? If so, this indicates a reversal of what you must have considered meritorious at one time.