Canyon College and the PhD(c)

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by PsychPhD, Oct 13, 2006.

Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member Staff Member

    I think the two are separate and distinct. I believe that Dave Wagner's intent was to convey that: (a) PsychPhD is starting to resemble a troll (which I think is true) and, entirely separately, (b) simon had referred to PsychPhD as "he" when nothing had as yet been mentioned as to PsychPhD's gender.
     
  2. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Oh, please do clarify

    Would you be so kind as to share with the class how you have come to this conclusion? In your answer, it would be helpful if you also highlighted how the behavior of others, especially simon and jtaee1920 who have made similarly belligerent "contributions" on a variety of threads, do not qualify.

    It is curious how the perjorative assignment of my gender is being conveniently ignored as evidence of inappropriate behavior.
     
  3. raristud2

    raristud2 New Member

    This thread should be closed
     
  4. JoAnnP38

    JoAnnP38 Member

    Re: Oh, please do clarify

    I agree. Dave's remarks were incredibly, unspeakably offensive and repulsive. The fact that so many are either ignoring his remarks or even worse supporting them is as morally reprehensible as I've ever seen on this forum.
     
  5. raristud2

    raristud2 New Member

    If Dave made reference to PsychPhd's posts as that of a man, would any of you classify his remarks as "incredibly, unspeakably offensive and repulsive"?
     
  6. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Hypocracy is as hypocracy does

    THIRTY FOUR MINUTES!
    It took just just more than half-an-hour to ignore your own advice.
    This is precisely the sort of loose logic and hypocracy that offends many of us here.

    But to answer your simplistically baited question, yes, if people were declaring me a man based upon the same flawed logic it would be just as odious. The statement is not as offensive as the manner in which it was devised!
     
  7. raristud2

    raristud2 New Member

    THIRTY FOUR MINUTES!
    It took just just more than half-an-hour to ignore your own advice.
    This is precisely the sort of loose logic and hypocracy that offends many of us here.

    That was a friendly suggestion to the moderators. Members may post here if they wish.

    " THIRTY FOUR MINUTES!"

    - You should have listed to my earlier post. Take a rest from the forum.

    "This is precisely the sort of loose logic and hypocracy that offends many of us here."

    - :rolleyes: really?
     
  8. simon

    simon New Member

    Re: Oh, please do clarify


    Ted, Raristud, Dave, jtaee and JoAnn please be aware that this troll continues to act-out behind its cloak of anonymity by attempting to split posters into opposing camps with its petty and irrelevant questions, allegations and issues. Yes JoAnn do not believe for a moment that this troll is interested in supporting the issue you raised. Apparently there was a misunderstanding regarding the issue you noted and I am certain that it can be rectified. However, this troll is merely using your issue as well as others as a means to split posters and create an environment of distrust. This is a subterfuge for the troll's true intent which is to maintain a sense of absolute control and superiority over other posters (based on a review of his "holier than thou" posts indicating that he is the grand defender of academic ethics and integrity while we mere mortals do not measure up to this troll's standards) and to post provocative and vindictive posts under a cloak of anonymity.

    In fact, this troll initiated another thread on this forum under the pretext of having a poll regarding civility when the actual purpose was to perpetuate its personal vendetta and to continue to create schism amongst posters. In addition, this troll raises the issue of civility from a detached perspective as if it does not pertain to its self. If this poster is truly a graduate from a distance doctoral program in Psychology it raises some serious questions regarding who is admitted and allowed to graduate from some of these programs.

    Once again I suggest that we not reinforce this troll's grossly acting-out behavior because it thrives on provoking anger in others and results in disagreements amongst posters as is occuring now. Merely review the initial letter this troll sent to the faculty member at Canyon U. and one will discern that it was highly provocative in tone and intent resulting in the defensive response of the faculty member. The same issues regarding the (c) status of this faculty member's doctoral candidacy could have been presented in a more collegial manner but was in fact not. This troll has displayed a clear pattern of engaging others in conflict and has to go! I suggest that we cease any further responses to him. It will only further empower it by our doing so.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 28, 2006
  9. raristud2

    raristud2 New Member

    Agreed. Very well said simon.
     
  10. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    STUNNING!

    Yet, here YOU are, spouting your belligerent bilge!

    And once again this hellacious hypocrite seeks to portray someone else as being the "evil doer" and prohibit someone else from exercising their right to post to other areas of the forum by spewing his trademark libel.

    This would be funny if this behavior wasn't so dangerous.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page