Peter French, Administrator

There has been a thread at www.distancedegree.net recently that involves several people making claims they won't back up. One says he's contacted 5 GAAP universities, all of whom say they will accept degrees from California Coast University. He refuses to say which schools they are. Another poster, while trying to demonstrate the inferiority of National University and Union, claims to be with a highly regarded research university. Of course, he refuses to say which school, or his affiliation with it. Finally, Peter French has written a threatening note to me on that board, where he also claims he now has a doctorate (beyond the ones he's claimed from ACU and Summit), but says he won't reveal the source. (Peter was also enrolled at MIGS at one time.)

French has written me threatening e-mails in the past, but this post was public. It looks like he's going to cut off my account over there because I continue to refute baseless claims made by a few people. Because of that, I feel it is necessary to put his comments (and my responses) on another public forum in case they disappear from his. See below.


Rich,

1. Brian or no one else for that matter owes you any explanation for anything - so ease off.

Peter, he repeated it several times. It is reasonable to ask. Plus, he posted an e-mail address, then refused again. It is relevant only to the extent that he, not anyone else, said it.

2. I would be careful what I said about Bryan's affiliation with HE and the institution. I know the facts, and he has reason for not disclosing them to you, as you are likely to do anything with them - people feel that they need to be cautious with you ... when you tone down a bit, people may treat you differently. His institution is one to be proud of and he is NOT the janitor either there or where he works.

You've employed vague warnings before, Peter. They're empty. As for advice on demeanor, I can think of other, greater sources. Or did you forget the threatening e-mails you sent me?

3. It is quite amusing really that you are having to go to such lengths to defend the institutions that you studied at, but get used to it, as from those I have talked to, you may find yourself having to follow the same course of action due to your PhD - where you did it and what you did it in. A lot are watching, and would like to see you mess up - like you have by working for an unaccredited school, which you also go to great lengths to defend.

You might consider them "great lengths." I see it as a desire to set the record straight. I notice nothing I've said about Union, National, or even MIGS has been refuted. Oh, and I note yet another vague threat. This comes from someone moderating a discussion board?

4. And finally, as you seem intent on making disparraging remarks as to this site and the reason for it being set up, why don't you go somewhere else, or are you a joke the also?

Actually, it's kinda fun to watch people make wild accusations, statements, etc., then utterly fail to back them up with even a shread of support.

Rich, in short you are becoming a real pain in the arse again, and about as welcome as Gus. If you have something to add, preferably positive, you are welcome. If all you can do is emphasise your belief in your own superiority, do it somewhere else where that is acceptable behaviour.

Thanks for the advice. But as I've noted earlier, I can think of considerably more credible sources for it.

People have the right to choose what they study and where. They dont have any obligation to have to defend their positons or choices to you, Gus or anyone else. THAT is degreeinfo territory - you are not there - remember?

No, they don't. But it is reasonable to ask people to support what they assert to be true. As to what is and what is not "degreeinfo" territory, that is a telling comment about why this board was set up. But as I've noted "there," no discussion board has a single mind. Unless, of course, its moderator(s) take(s) steps to eliminate certain lines of discussion or thought. You're not doing that, I'm sure.

There are a lot of people with nationally accredited, State Licensed and unaccredited degrees who are accepted in the workplace - professionals, executive and academics. Sorry, but that is true. Now don't bother asking for 'evidence' - go find it yourself. Pacific Western degrees have been accepted and defended out here at a top university by the Vice Chancellor, my doctorate has been accepted and I didn't request that it be assessed - don't ask whre as you'll not be told - and many others. Your restricted study doesn't alter that fact either way, and it will be interesting to read your chapter on the limitations of your study, or don't you have to bother about that at Union? Maybe that is why you never answered my questions about this? Anyway we will find out won't we?

Actually, Peter, you displayed a remarkable lack of understanding of inferential statistics, and then never followed up. What is it I'm supposed to explain to you that you would actually understand? You didn't respond to what I did explain, so why bother going on? Sorry, but you aren't exactly qualified to comment on someone's doctoral work, not having completed one yourself. (As you've admonished me many times. ) Or do you? You seem to want to keep its source secret. That now seems to be a common behavior on this board: state some personal qualification or behavior, then refuse to give any details that would lend even a shred of credibility to it. Well, you've done a lot of claiming and denying regarding your two doctorates from unaccredited schools that it's hard to keep up.

Rich, cut the bias and the 'superiority' out, or try another group.

You have been told ... and it has been along time coming.

Peter
Administrator

What "bias"? Disagreeing with someone or something isn't "bias." If it is, then everyone is "biased." (Actually, everyone has some biases.)

I've "been told"? What is that supposed to mean? Are you threatening to halt my account? Or are you threatening my personal safety, as you've done previously? I guess you can stop my account, if you choose. But that would be very telling, even more so than this little note has been. If you think I'm in violation of the TOS in some way, please point it out. Until then, please stop acting in such a capricious and arbitrary manner. If you don't like what I say (beyond violations of the TOS, of course), you can choose ignore it.

 

Rich

You do have a way with people.

I like distancedegree. I am way ruder to you over there. I think I was granted immunity.

Wouldn't hurt to lighten up.

 

I don't think Peter claims to have another doctorate -- he says only that his doctorate has been assessed and accepted.

I have a great deal of admiration for Peter. And his posts (misspellings and all) have a zest lacking in most others.

I agree with Dennis: "Wouldn't hurt to lighten up."

 

Howdy stranger.

 

Yeah, I see where it's that Peter claims one of his doctorates has been "assessed." I wonder what that means?

As for lightening up, that's always a good idea. But I've received threatening e-mails from Peter, and now this. Why is that behavior not suggested for "lightening up"?

It will be interesting to see if he lets this die down. I'm always up for that.

 

No, Peter is indeed claiming another unaccredited doctorate, this one from the University of Integrative Learning (UIL). It does not seem, however, that he has done any new work for it. Instead, it appears that Mel Suhd (they are buddies) has simply granted him a degree based on the work he did for Mel’s previous degree mill, Summit University. I do think it’s funny, however, that just a few short weeks ago Peter was vehemently stating that he would never again claim an unaccredited degree, and that all his previous degree mill credentials no longer existed.

I don’t know why UIL has not been discussed more frequently (at all?) on this forum. For an open letter from Mel Suhd to Peter French (in which he states UIL’s willingness to convert Summit degrees to UIL degrees) can be found here.

 

So, it IS another fake degree. UIL misstates accreditation. It also seems to be licensed in Wyoming, while operating from California. Very convenient.

 

Gus

Enough about Peter, now where specifically did all your degrees come from? Peter has stated where all of his degrees came from and I have, in the past stated that I have 2 bachelors degrees from the University of Alberta.

It would be nice to know where the criticism is coming from.

You just can't get any respect at distancedegree and it drives you crazy.


Arf Arf

 

I thought that distancedegree was basically dead a long time ago.

 

I liked DistanceDegree for awhile, as it gave those with unaccredited degrees a place to hang out that isn't as critical as we tend to be here.

However, I do think these developments listed by Rich are not good. I fear that the DD board is becoming what a lot feared it would.


Bruce

 

Goeie more, Gert! We thought you fell in.

 

Re: Gus

What you or Peter chooses to discuss publicly is your business. You have obviously mistaken me for someone who cares. As I have told you more than once before, I will be glad to tell you where I earned my degrees if you can give me a sound, logical and persuasive reason why it would be in my best interest to do so.

Criticism? What criticism? Reread the above post; every statement I made is a verifiable statement of fact. Moreover, criticism, if and when dispensed, comes from me, and not my degrees or the institutions that granted them.

I see no reason to seek or value respect from what are, for the most part, a group of individuals who possess and/or promote degree mill credentials. My posts there are strictly to protect an unsuspecting public from false and misleading information. Moreover, as witnessed by the obsessive nature and borderline stalking behavior of many of the members of that forum (which now appears to have spilled over into this forum), it appears that you may have it backwards: It is I who is driving all of you crazy.

 

Re: Re: Gus

Surprise!!! Surprise!!!

Dr. Dr. Dr. Peter French, Administrator, has just banned me from DistanceDegree.net. It seems that excommunication is the fate that awaits all who will not worship at the altar of unaccredited and degree mill credentials.

 

Gus:

Are you sure? I just read where it was Peter who was admonished by the owner of the board. Peter then skulked off (apparently taking this three fake doctorates with him).

The owner locked the thread in question, but my account is still active.

 

Rich is just whining. The only problem with distancedegree is that it was designed for people who have other interests in education than strictly regionally accredited.

Rich and Gus take a peculiar interest in challenging any statement made there. Being told repeatedly that your school is dog poo is discouraging to many, so no posts.

The R/A cheerleaders are much more agressive there than they are here, but so are the people who post there with any regularity.

I can't understand why Rich and Gus weren't banned there a long time ago as all that is there is a real bad imitation of degreeinfo.


Peter French's Lapdog

Arf Arf

 

Rich:

I tried to log on to DistanceDegree again this morning and still received the same Critical Warning:

• 
  You have been banned from this forum
  Please contact the webmaster or board administrator for more information

I did l access the site from another computer, but I didn’t see the post you mentioned. I do not doubt, however, that Peter might have been chastised for his abuse of power. The few times that Bruce (the owner of Distance Degree) has exercised his authority, he has done so in a fair, logical, and balance manner.

It is interesting to note that five or six posts in a single thread brought up my name (mostly in a denigrating way) before I even bothered to respond. Here’s what I had to say.

• 
  On April 2nd of last year, before this forum came into being, in a post on DegreeInfo (see here) I stated the following:
  
  ” My prediction is that if the new forum proceeds as described, it will quickly degenerate into an unaccredited degree love fest. The majority of posters will be touting unaccredited degrees and schools (an amalgam of the good, the bad, and the ugly) in the mistaken belief that if others make the same choice, it will enhance the utility of their own degrees, with a few dissenters whining and complaining that if they hadn’t followed a certain famous author’s advice, or if this author’s opinion hadn’t evolved with the times (a recent disturbing trend), they wouldn’t be in their present predicament.”
  
  Recent posts on this forum have proven me correct. Your latest admonitions and threats, Peter, not to mention your infantile revilements (which could be more easily ignored if you weren't once again an Administrator of this forum), suggest that allowing the free flow of information is not a priority of those who run DistanceDegree.net. It appears that divergent ideas and opinions, even (or perhaps better said, particularly) if supported by sound evidence, are not allowed. However, name-calling, threats, and childish insults are permitted, as long as you are in agreement with the “powers that be” and are granted “immunity”.
  
  What you fail to realize, Peter, is that I post here precisely because there are those who wish I didn’t or couldn’t. I see my role as that of protecting the public interest. When someone promotes a degree mill, or offers unsound advice and recommendations that might injure an unsuspecting individual in some way, I feel obligated to present evidence refuting false and misleading information. As such, I will continue to post until I am banned. Moreover, if I am banned (or anyone else, for that matter) for any reason except a clear violation of the TOS, what will that say about this forum or the individuals that run it?
  
  Dissent, diverging opinions, and perhaps more importantly, factual information are the life’s blood of a discussion forum; it’s all about content. Witness the volume of posts on this forum when Rich or I fail to post for a while; it drops to practically zero. There aren’t even any off-topic discussions! (Could that be the reason you feel compelled to disparage Rich or me in the majority of your posts?)
  
  If the personal attacks and heavy-handed censorship and intimidation are allowed to continue (by and with the blessing of those that run this forum), DistanceDegree.net will remain as dead as it has been the last few months. Shenanigans like the recent spate we've experienced scare away the newbies (when was the last time someone asked a legitimate question concerning distance education?), and even regular members and old-timers are reticent to post.

Yep, I guess it’s easy to see why I was banned…

 

Clear as a bell.

 

The statements are challenged because they are unsupported by the facts. Statements like these are often called mistakes, falsehoods, misstatements, or even lies.

Please point out where I've been incorrect, even once, in refuting these.

 

Strange. I've been far more vocal of the small bunch of liars represented there, but my account is intact. (I just checked.)

I, too, have found the owner of that board to be pretty fair. Here's what he had to say about Peter:

Ok,

I turn my back for a minute and you wacko's start slinging the mud.
I have locked the lastest thread to stop the madness.

I'm asking all of you to calm down and act more professionally.

Now for some reality:

1 - Peter does not run this board, I do.

2 - Peter acts on my behalf when I'm traveling but only in board management capacity or moderator.

3 - Peter's capability has been removed so there is no question who is in charge.

4 - Regardless, of what anyone thinks, I do not give a s**t about any of your discussions nor do I have an agenda. I simply provide a service. Period end of story. I run the board that's it.

5 - I will repeat ! Take you s**t slinging somewhere else ! That goes for everyone.

Now back to our war programming....

God

 

Also....

It is odd that Distancedegree.net has banned Gus. I guess Bruce shut off Peter's rights before Peter could get to my account. But neither Gus nor I have violated the board's TOS. It is a place very tolerant of insults and lies. It would seem strange to find it also intolerant of the facts.