Saint Regis University

I consider what you are defending to be dishonest. Here's why:

A. Simply lying, and inventing a degree that was not earned, is obviously dishonest. Most people are reluctant to lie that brazenly.

B. So people go out and spend thousands of dollars to be handed degrees that they did not earn.

C. This permits people to pretend to themselves that they are telling the truth. They received a St. Regis degree (true). St. Regis is accredited by Liberia (true). So where's the lie?

D. The lie is precisely where it's always been: in falsely claiming an education. If it's a lie to freely invent a degree that wasn't earned, then it remains a lie to claim a degree that wasn't earned, even if you pay thousands of dollars for it.

That, after all, is why employers and graduate schools require degrees in the first place. They aren't simply interested in whether the degree is "legal", they are interested in what it means, in what it's telling them about the person that presents it.

I have already addressed this in several previous posts.

I don't think that anyone believes that legitimate universities will knowingly accept degree-mill degrees. They reject them, and believe that they have robust meaures in place to screen them out. But we know that those procedures can sometimes be beaten, and claiming empty "flag of convenience" accreditation from a foreign government is one way to do it.

That seems to be what you are arguing for in this thread: If incompetent admissions offices can be tricked, then why not trick them?

Lying can sometimes be profitable.

While there may (or may not) be some sympathy for the long-suffering Liberians, I wonder if that would extend to American graduates of American degree-mills claiming the meaningless "accreditation" of the fallen regime.

When the smokescreen that you are laying down clears, nothing has changed. It's still about lying.

Just because you think that you have found some places where an unearned degree-mill diploma might temporarily pass (until the idiots concerned wise up to what's happening), doesn't mean that claiming an education that you didn't receive stops being a lie.

If it's your purpose here to establish degree-mills as another viable DL option alongside all the rest, then I think that you will continue to receive a very cold reception. That kind of academic dishonesty is simply not going to fly.

 

This is the kind of response that causes people to question your honesty. You DID NOT wish me a safe 4th of July. You said that you hoped I didn't get my hand blown off. These are two VERY different things. In order for you to have that thought, you mind must first create the idea or image that my hand WAS blown off. This first thought is the one to which I was referring. As for your instability, something about a river in Egypt comes to mind.

Jack

 

I wished you a safe July 4th, if you won't take it from the horses mouth not much I can say, have a safe July 5th.

 

No you didn't. Are you also denying that you were offering to get into a physical confrontation with me? Like I said before, you're being dishonest when you say things like that. True that it is being dishonest about silly almost meaningless statements but, it could be an indication as to how you might react in other situations.

 

A few months ago I joined the SRU discussion forum. This is quite different to discussions on DegreeInfo - SRU discussions are carried out in a far more pleasant way than is the present case with DegreeInfo.
It certainly seems to me that a small number of 'would be DL expert' members of DegreeInfo see their role as building a DL monument to themselves in their own lifetime.
plcscott hit the nail on the head in a recent K-W discussion, when he stated that certain members of DegreeInfo
1. Stand on a moral pedestal, and falsely accuse people (and
abuse anyone who dare support, or say anything positive
about, an unaccredited institution - my words not those of
plcscott)
2. Be at the height of arrogance (mainly would be lawyers and
doctors, and possibly accountants, I say)
3. Call people names
4. Offend constantly
Such members really need to take a close look at themselves - and to take a leaf out of Frank Abnagale's book. According to the movie Frank got to where he was going by good looks, charm, personality, intelligence and fake degrees!

 

PS Forgot to mention that the members to whom plcscott refers should also follow the recent example set by Dr Rich Douglas. Historically Rich was one of the rudest people ever seen on internet discussion groups. What happened I dont know (but he
may well have seen 'Catch Me If You Can'), but he changed overnight to become pleasant, constructive, understanding, and above all, polite in his postings. And at the same time displaying
his knowledge on DL matters.
Sadly Rich doesn't seem to want to post anymore on this site.
One wonders why?

 

It's still disturbing to me that people think *I'm* lying. Like i'm PERSONALLY being dishonest. I'm not using an SRU degree. I'm just highlighting some of the possible benefits of an SRU degree. Like I said, you can get mad at their method, but you can't deny the value. If SRU operates legally, which I don't think anyone is disputing, then there is no difference between someone from Yale laughing me out of the room with my Bellevue degree, or you criticizing someone with an SRU degree. It technically falls into the spectrum of colleges, RA or not.

 

First of all, any university that accepts a degree from SRU needs to have their admissions department revamped. However, with the conflict now Brewing in Liberia and the possibility of US occupation, it may become more "Politically Correct" for an institution to accept a degree from Libera, maybe even go as far as making additional exceptions for it. One example (although not educationally related) is the response after WTC. One program that was set up for WTC victims and their families was a "Disaster Relief Medicaid" program, entitling anyone that was affected by WTC - Directly or Indirectly- to qualify for Medicaid benefits for 4 months, no questions asked and no financial check. This system, obviously set up for real WTC victims and their families, was "abused" by many others who did not and were not affected by WTC, therefore driving up medicaid enrollment up tenfold. This was due, in part, for the "rushed" way the system was put together by NYC and NYS, with unclear regulations and not much information deceminated to the supporting instutions. Since I work in a NYC hospital (i got to see a lot of this) I would watch individuals who owned homes in LI and BMW's use a NYC address from a family member or friend, and drive off with their medicaid card (you can get a lot for medicaid in NY)! The "loophole" here is that everybody who lived in the 5 boroughs of NYC was affected by WTC, and therefore qualified. This is a similiar "loophole" that I see happening with the Liberian issue, and a proactive approach must be taken.


Getting back to the question of a SRU degree being accepted by an RA institution, my answer to that is for someone to invest some money in an SRU degree, and then use it to apply to different instutions - and see what happens! (Has something like this ever been done before?) Sometimes the people you talk to on the phone aren't necessiarly the ones reviewing the application. Sometimes it is a Head of a specific department where you major lies. I am in no way advocating or supporting the use of an SRU degree to defraud an RA instution, but to provide a checks and balances to instutions whose staff may not be doing their job appropriately.


As far as this ongoing argument here - we all are hear for a reason, and one of those reasons is to stop instutions like SRU from profiting and defrauding DL learners. Arguing about who said what is fruitless and not productive to these forums as a whole, and we need to view ourselves as a team!

 

It certainly seems to me that you are trying to get Degreeinfo to accept St. Regis as a viable distance education alternative. In effect that's arguing that Degreeinfo endorse unearned degrees if using them can be profitable.

Lying can sometimes get us things that we want. Nobody disputes that.

That's ridiculous.

Both Yale and Bellevue require students to learn the material that's expected in a degree program. St. Regis doesn't require that students learn anything. It just sells unearned diplomas that its customers can use to try to mislead employers and graduate schools about an education that never happened.

 

A voice of reason in an ocean of judge lynch

 

Wow! What power this Dr. Bear has! Surely he can walk on water as well.

I find it simplistic, at best, the thought that John could convince a college not to accept "degrees" from St. Regis. I find it equally simplistic that he could convince a vice president at a regionally accredited college not to accept "degrees" from St. Regis.

Now, could they become convinced after reading about the school in Bears' Guide? Possibly.

All that anyone would really have to do would be to read the April 2002 article in The Australian to know that it is a degree mill.



Tom Nixon

 

And did he convince North Dakota, New Jersey and Oregon to deem these "degrees" illegal? Hmmmmmmmm.

 

Tom, the secret is out. It has nothing to do with simple parlor tricks like walking on water. When you become a Senior Member of DegreeInfo and are deemed worthy by the secret Society of Accredited and Nothing Else (SANE) then you receive a special mind control ring that allows you to bully the truth out of people by just writing email and forum posts.

BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA


(Evil drunk with power laugh, In honor of Steve Levicoff.)

 

Could someone reset my number of post? I do not want to be a senior member if this is what happens. I do not aspire to be an obnoxious, and rude bully. I prefer to treat people with respect, and think for myself.

 

Too late. Waaaaay too late.

 

What I meant to say was,
"Drunk-with-power evil laugh"?

 

Bill I wanted to meet with you face to face to show you it's not so easy calling people names to their face as it is posting here. I'm not anonymous like atlas1212 I'm a real person who takes real offense when someone calls me dishonest in a public forum.
Would you be calling me dishonest if this thread occured in person? I don't think so. So why is it "ok" for you to do it here? It's NOT "ok" Bill. And I'm taking a stand right here to tell you that so you can learn from this in the future.

I don't have anything to hide, I didnt start this thread, bring up Bellevue, SRU, call anyone a liar, akin anyone to drug dealing, I didn't say Liberia accred has value unlike Jack Tracey's erroneous post. I don't even have a degree for that matter. If you have the choice to err on the side of being civil and bullying name calling tactics, I sincerely hope in the future you choose civility.

 

Fnhayes, what an enlightening post. I will add by including this Quote:

"
<...>
My rule: don't allow a comment to remain posted that the poster wouldn't dare say directly to someone's face. These things are cowardly and distasteful, and have no place in civil discourse.

The opportunity to communicate with others is a privilege--not a right--granted to you by those other people. Face-to-face, one can turn away. E-mail can be filtered. Here, the ONLY way things can be kept civil is through vigilant moderation. Anything short of that will turn this board into graffiti.

Those that object should consider their own behavior.

Rich Douglas "

 

I guess we would have to ask Freud and he's dead.

Personally, I liked it the first way.

 

In a social setting people are polite. In a debate people say what has to be said. Anyone who gets offended by anything in a debate has issues beyond this board.

Some people just don't like the merchants of blood degrees and their apologists. To some people, debating about degree mills is like debating the merits of racism. There is no middle ground.

The last time Rich quit posting here was because he perceived himself as being uncharacteristically a bit too vociferous in attacking degree mill merchants and apologists. He came back.