Degree Mill Shilling?

We know may degree mills closely watch this forum because often their web sites will be changed immediately after a related message is posted here.

A few of the degree mill representatives have been upfront and admitted their connection. I am thinking of Knightsbridge and St Regis.

Lately we have had a series of factless posts incorrectly suggesting degreeinfo bias when that clearly isn't the case. These remind me of the posts made on AED to disrupt discussion.

Is it possible these actually come from a degree mill shill or another person than the one indicated in the posts?

 

My guess is no. That's only a guess. If we're thinking of the same posts, the accusation of bias fits in with a whingeing attitude overall. The repetitiveness and belligerence, if they're coming from shills, indicate that the posters aren't very good shills.

I never saw the stuff on aed, if memory serves, so there's not much of a benchmark for me. However, the Hellenic fellow from SRU or Berne, whichever it was, whose name I have forgotten (Deo gratias!), flared up briefly and was gone. Of course, since he wrote under a pseudonym, I never did have the chance to fix his name in memory by perusing his brilliantly controversial writings. I'll bear up somehow.

What the 8-track crowd doesn't seem to understand is that repeating the same junk over and over again in a vaguely belligerent--yet uninteresting--manner does not quite make the
"big lie" grade. But then, Dr Goebbels' doctorate was from a brick-and-mortar RA-equivalent institution--not KW!

 

If my post is one of the series of posts you’re referring to, (“Highest Level of Accreditation?”) I think I laid out the facts accurately.

I post under my real name and I’m not hard to find and my affiliation can be ascertained by anyone who chooses to perform a search.

The bias is clearly stated, a Featured School must be RA or GAAP. The only question, still unanswered, is why?

 

Re: Re: Degree Mill Shilling?

It's been answered by one of the moderators. IIRC, it is due to the limited (compared to RA and foreign GAAP) utility of degrees from DETC-accredited schools. John Bear's survey of AACRAO members demonstrated that for admissions purposes and I did the same for employment. Even DETC's own survey shows the difficulty with using a degree from a DETC-accredited school to advance academically.

Again, asked and answered (not by me).

 

My guess is that it is not degree mill shills. It is some fellows that apparently feel compelled to defend all unaccredited schools. It seems that even though the vast majority of unaccredited schools are degree mill shams, they still seem compelled for some reason to first assume that they are fine schools and will defend them as such. I am guessing that they view themselves as fighting for the underdog rather than defenders of fraud. Interestingly, it seems that they are unwilling to admit to any mistakes no matter how minor or insignificant. I'm guessing that this is critical in explaining how they became defenders of fraud.

 

Re: Re: Degree Mill Shilling?

Hi David

No your post was not one that I was thinking of. Although I disagree with your premise it was logically layed out and presented.

 

Hi Dave,

I hope you aren't referring to the DETC defender corps. I know it is an uphill battle for DETC accredited universities. The # 2 guy thing...

We may not agree on the utility of them, but I don't think they are diploma mills.

Mike - DETC Student " we try harder"

 

Re: Re: Degree Mill Shilling?

Why indeed!!!! Because that is what this forum is based on. A private, commercial forum that operates and protects the shills that advocate a RA only agenda. The bias shown by the forum owners attracts a few people with the same or easily formed opinions. They attack counter views and quickly like the patting on the head they get from their masters. They hunt together and like a pack use numbers and volume to try and drown out any opposition. When a few, as now, resist they go to threads like this one to try to win what their screaming fails to do. Approved and DETC are a part of Distance Education, several people posting here even having taken money from unaccredited schools. Which I by the way have not. I've paid money to unaccredited schools, but never received one dollar from them. Some on degreeinfo can't make that statement. Non- traditional education is made up of RA/DL programs, DETC schools, State Approved schools, and hiding your head in the sand won't make DETC or Approved go away, neither will biased so-called research or the shouts of the degree police.

 

Re: Re: Re: Degree Mill Shilling?

And thank you for illustrating Dave's point.



Tom Nixon

 

Re: Re: Re: Degree Mill Shilling?

Where is this "biased research"? You say this all the time, but you never actually address it. Whose research? How is it biased?

C'mon, don't ignore it. Answer it.

 

And, up pops the shill like behavior I was speaking of



1. Little to no facts
2. Opinion stated as facts
3. Intellectual fallacies presented as arguements
3. Angry chip on shoulder behavior
4. Trys to shout out opinions that disagree, but unwilling to discuss it.

 

I very proudly shill for all the legal choices, State Approved, DETC, RA/DL. I like many different forms of distance education without feeling the need to feel superior or trying to limit the choices of other people. A proud non-member of the degree police.

 

And, the follow-up comments from Tom, Rich and DaveH are precisely what James is talking about.
Dr Duck

 

A question for Mr. kf5k

Mr. kf5k has referred more than once to "biased so-called research" discussed on this forum.

I would be very interested in knowing which research he is referring to, and if, perchance, he is referring either to my research with the registrars and admissions officers, or Rich Douglas' doctoral dissertation research, or possibly to the most negative published findings on DETC (their own 2002 research on the acceptance of the degrees) then what he believes is biased therein.

Thank you.

John

 

My dear Dr Boyd: No, I was not at all thinking of you. Our brief private correspondence was most cordial and my opinion of your school was and is good, for whatever that's worth. Besides, your school is named for my all-time favorite CJ.

What strikes me as funny is that I am a fairly enthusiastic advocate of many NA, certain CA-approved, and even some unA schools. And yet, the children's chorus (ah, I hear the 8-track goin' round and round) resented it mightily when I pointed out that behaving like a jerk--and a barely literate jerk, at that--is no way to win friends either for oneself or for the schools one chooses to defend.

The nice thing about this forum is that one can make an allusion and the documentation appears hey presto! as if by magic. Life is grand. Why do the whingers mouth their silly slogans and complain of persecution in the face of disagreement? In the words of the late Chief Justice Taft, uttered during his tenure of another federal office, "God knows".

 

Re: A question for Mr. kf5k

All of the above. Small, poorly done, and not broad enough to be representative of the nation. Douglas is biased and would do any study to prove his own views. As for your efforts. How many of the distance learning RA/ programs in your 15th edition accept DETC transfer credits? Which companies are you saying don't accept DETC degrees? This is a country of millions of businesses. How many did you check with before determining that DETC is poorly accepted?

 

kf5k wrote:

> I very proudly shill for all the legal choices, State Approved,
> DETC, RA/DL.

Does this mean that you believe the current laws are exactly right? There is not a single legal school in the US that you think should be illegal, and not a single illegal school in the US that you think should be legal?

> This is a country of millions of businesses. How many did you
> check with before determining that DETC is poorly accepted?

Do you believe that sample size should be proportional to the size of the population being sampled? If the US has 10 times as many people as Canada, would measuring the height of 100 Americans tell you less about the height of the average American than measuring the height of 100 Canadians would tell you about the height of the average Canadian?

 

These threads move around faster than a degree mill looking for a new home...!

I posted this on another thread:

Rich, I think James is suggesting that the number of responses you received from your research may not have been a representative sample of the universe of registered corporations. Therefore, inferences made from the limited data you received would be a scientifically derived guess. A little more information concerning the research and its construct would be useful.

 

My tolerance for educational credibility is broader than RA. As I've stated before RA/NA/SA all have a place in the market and generally with utility in the order just stated. There are some schools that are simply licensed and unaccredited that have merit too but they have to be taken on a case by case basis. There are other forms of education such as corporate education that should also be considered and that too is unaccredited. So, as far as unaccredited goes, it isn't right to shoot on sight and ask questions later. I have no tolerance for shams and degree mills and I admit that it is a fair assumption to say that many of the unaccredited schools are suspect, with some outright scams. For instance, from what I've read, Hamilton U. may exist legally, but education from there appears to be a complete sham.

 

Yeah Kirk, that's pretty much what I meant, it's a piece of crap.