CollegeHints Promotes Another Less-Than-Wonderful School.

Sorry, fnhayes, I am not sure who you mean by the "King of Degree Mills" and I don't know who you mean by the "Gang of Six".

 

Since you have, in this thread, accused me of "joining the gang" I assume that I am included in your sweeping generalization.

Well, I admit that I might have given some passing support to what, by Oregon law and general opinion, is a degree mill. Yes, I did defend your alma mater. I stated that Knightsrbridge is not nearly as bad as some of the other schools that ODA does not label as degree mills. If that is what you are speaking of, I admit that I am guilty.

Other than a small bit of fleeting support for your alma mater, in relation to other degree mills, please show me any instance in which I have promoted a degree mill.

 

I wonder who the "King of Degree Mills" is?

Posting about degree mills doesn't promote them, especially if one is critical of them. But advertising for them certainly qualifies, as we see at CollegeHints.

Another thing that promotes degree mills is the elimination of anyone and any post that points out the fake degrees held by some members, and sold by another.

Perhaps Hayes refers to himself as the "King of Degree Mills"? Claiming two fake Ph.D.'s is notable, but hardly puts him on top. Walter Rummersfeld leads that pack, IMHO. But he wasn't as active and adamant. Maybe Hayes is the current title holder?

 

You can't even get this little thing right. It was John Bear and the Gang of Six. Many of the original "gang" are not active, nor do you name them. C'mon, get something right!

It is interesting that you are using the same term coined by another degree mill promoter. I guess it feels natural.

 

RC,
The 'Gang of Six' also includes 'THE KING OF DEGREE MILLS'. Neither John Bear or JeffH are in the 'gang'.
As I said earlier CH leaves DI for dead when it comes to offering advice to prospective DL students (at DI they invariably get abused by the 'gang' and never return), expertise in a wide field of DL education, respect for all members, treating all members with respect, open and frank discussions on accreditation, unaccredited, degree mills, etc., plus moderators that have the respect of all members.
Dr Anatidae (Knightsbridge)

 

A couple of points

I think Rich is still smarting from being banned at CollegeHints. I don't think he has discovered that the point of the exercise is not to beat others.

The site doesn't promote, it displays advertising, not unlike many periodicals. It takes funds to run a site. I'm sure they would run ads from the same advertisers as here should those advertisers wish to do so.

You can generally post your point or fact at the site without being accosted or insulted. DETC, State Approved, State Licensed, and some unaccredited distance schools are discussed. So are many regionally accredited options. Most posters openly promote accredited schools.

I think the major psychological difference is that the members there don't see themselves as apostles in the fight to rid the world of phony schools. This is not to say they encourage phony schools only that their mission is not to chastise or obliterate. Since they aren't under the tutelage of a debunking mindset, there is more tendency to encourage and investigate various alternatives in distance education. I think a broader scholarly base with expertise in the field would be welcome.

 

Re: A couple of points

I am sorry but I think this post misses the bigger picture. I see that the CH board has as big or bigger issues than this board.

It seems the board sport is knocking Rich unfairly. It was especially funny when Peter French threw a "hissy fit" that they even let Rich post.

I do see some accurate info there but I also see quite a bit of incrediably inaccurate info posted there.

 

Re: A couple of points

No, it wouldn't. If you post facts about the degree mills the board advertises and supports, you get banned.

Have you read the insults tossed my way, especially since I've been banned (and, therefore, cannot retort)? Jimmy Clifton recently called me a hypocrite. Jimmy Clifton! That's the tone the board sets.

It can't even get the simple facts straight, either. In an attempt to smear Union, several posters are placing utterly misleading and incorrect messages regarding Union and quality. But if someone posts the opposite, that person is banned. (The current thread on the subject states that Union is in trouble with the USDoE because of quality issues. Not true. Its troubles with the USDoE stem from documentation of learning, not the quality of learning. The OBR felt some dissertations they reviewed were questionable, but that's hardly the same thing. Neither the OBR nor the USDoE are at all suggesting the Union stop their Ph.D. progam. But you wouldn't know that from reading CollegeHints, a board heavily populated with people who don't know what they're talking about, but post anyway.)

No, several posters on CollegeHints have said some pretty mean and petty things about me that aren't true, including insinuating that my doctoral work isn't somehow up to standard. But how could they judge? None of them had any involvement with my work, nor does any of them have a doctoral degree from a properly recognized school! How would they know? This is a prime example of laziness, off-topic flaming, and plain old B.S. But that's what passes for discourse on that board. Polite? At times, but most of DegreeInfo is polite, too. Unless some degree mill shill gets his knickers in a knot.

I'm not "smarting" from being banned. But I'm not going to take it as if it's some form of shame. Look at the source, for goodness sakes!

Saying that advertising diploma mills isn't promoting them is just wrong. Just like the USA Today and Economist magazine are wrong, so is CollegeHints. If DegreeInfo did it, they'd be wrong, too. But they don't, and for good reason.

 

Re: Re: A couple of points

I MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

This thread is a perfect example of why this board is the best place for quality information about Distance Learning.

While I don't agree with almost everything that "fnhayes" writes, he can post his thoughts and opinions within the TOS and not be banned. I can't say the same of CollegeHints, which banned Rich & others for speaking the truth about certain schools.

To get banned here, you really have to work for it.

 

Re: Re: Re: A couple of points

Yes, you did. You said:

Isn't is amusing that several Union doctorate holders have vehemently, acerbically, and relentlessly condemned other institutions of higher learning, even some that are RA/NA? Can someone say "Hypocrite?"

Oh sure, some Union doctoral holders say they wouldn't recommend Union today. But, how do we know Union's standards have ever been any better than they are today? A Union graduate is a Union graduate is a Union graduate!

I'm the only Union graduate to post on CollegeHints. Steve Levicoff and I are the only ones who post on DegreeInfo. And I'm the one who graduated recently (about a year ago). So, Jimmy, you were talking about me and you called me a hypocrite. Even if you didn't mean it for me, you still engaged in the behavior, which is the point. Calling people names like that hardly befits the so-called nice envrionment of CollegeHints. That board is filled with statements like yours.

As far as Union goes, you don't know what you're talking about. You have neither the insight nor the experience, and you have your facts wrong. You want people to treat you with respect--or civility, at least--and then you engage in petty name-calling.

I got banned for responding to stuff like that, as did Gus.

The link:
Jimmy's Statement

 

It appears to me that most who post on both sites have less-than-wonderful-degrees (RA or not) and there is, among contributors to both sites, that never ending quest to get the 'best' degree at the cheapest price with the least amount of work!

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: A couple of points

Rich, my friend,

You really need to learn how to comprehend what you read.

I DID NOT call ANYONE a hypocrite. I mentioned no names in my post.

You mentioned my name several times in two posts and called into question my "insight" and "experience." You almost sound as if you have a symbiotic relationship with Union.

Furthermore, I have criticized others on here and on AED for constantly attacking you.

Now, there are more than a dozen DL forums on the Internet. In my favorites I have AED, DI, CH, and the new one, Online Learning Directory.

I periodically visit the others after doing some google and dogpile searches and Union is sometimes mentioned in those forums.

Also, everyone knows I love politics. I really like Governor Taft of Ohio. Periodically I pull up Ohio newspapers and read the editorials about his job performance.

In doing so I periodically see articles about Union and its problems. Union graduates are often quoted in those articles.

Contrary to what you may want to believe, Union and Rich Douglas are not synonymous.

 

Fine, Jimmy. Fine. You don't mention names, but you posted your comments on CollegeHints, not one of those other boards, and you did so in a thread that refers to me several times. No, Union and I aren't the same things, but who else could you have been referring to? Besides, it doesn't matter who. You called someone with a Union degree a hypocrite, typical of the discourse found on that board. Just like your lame defense.

 

Well Rich, I noticed when I defended you numerous times you didn't refer to that as "lame." You are a much better man than to engage in such selective abstractions!

Now Rich, you have this penchant to frenetically respond to those whom you think are against you.

Since you, sadly, now place me in that category, and since you have a proclivity to engage in circular argumentation, I will not respond to these absurdities again.

I am NOT your enemy. Have you forgotten (rhetorical question) how I stated, when I was allowed to come back on here, that I attributed my realization I had engaged in some bad choices to you?

 

worried about Rich Douglas

There are worse things than Union with which to be synonymous.

The problem with you, Rich, is that you don't know how to get people to respect you. Can I give you some advice on how to spiff up your image?

1) Run much-less-than-wonderful schools and then deny you did so.
2) Create imaginary organizations of which you can be chief cook and bottle washer and then deny you did so.
3) Adopt a pompous rhetorical style which accentuates the lack of substance in what you say.
4) Abuse people over and over again but become wildly indignant when anyone objects.
5) Oscillate between arrogance and servility on the apparent assumption that other posters are all stupider than yourself, and will fall for this, uh, repentance.
6) Keep trying to create the impression of intimate association with schools from which you only took a few courses.
7) Loudly trumpet your acceptance to every school from here to Harare--nevermind that somehow you never actually do anything with the schools.
8) Keep assiduously erasing your internet tracks so that you can claim that all who observe what you do are evil meanies.
9) Whenever anybody calls you Doctor be really noble and allow them to call you, say, Ricky. That way you can be a man of the people and an intalekshul at the same time.

These are just some suggestions. Purely, purely theoretical, you understand. Just because it's possible to call you Doctor without snickering doesn't mean your image doesn't need help. Oh, yeah, one other thing. I'll pray for you.

 

Re: worried about Rich Douglas

Thank you!

 

Re: Re: worried about Rich Douglas

Jimmy:

It's not a matter of "enemies." Such strong rhetoric! Don't make this what it isn't.

The least you could do is stand by what you wrote. If not, fine. Let's drop it.

P.S.: Thanks, Unk, for that "advice." Adjusted for sarcasm, it makes both the meaning and its intended target quite clear!

 

changing the subject?

Since this thread originally began with comments about the promotion of some not-exactly-ivy-league schools (they charge low income students for their services, for example), let me ask a question related to the initial topic.

I have the impression that some groups of unaccredited degree-granting organizations advertise via unsolicited email. The Romanian group and its descendants does this, as does Kennedy-Western.

Some advertise via "sponsored links" on Google. The short-lived American Coastline version whose domain name ended in ".org" (not to be confused with the ".edu" version which shares an address with the Moscow branch of the International University of Fundamental Studies) did this. For a brief time, after posting an extensively edited transcript of that CNN interview in August, 2003 Saint Regis did this too. Lexington does this, as do a number of "degree broker" sites.

How else do these organizations attract clients? I do not spend much time with tabloids (in the newspaper sense, as opposed to that employed by Richard Hoyer ["tabloid web site"] and Daniel Taylor ["a public tabloid forum"]) so don't know how much advertizing is there. I do realize that USA Today sometimes has ads for not-wonderful places that provide degrees.

What else is there?

G

 

The phrase "all doctoral program graduates", and the last-quoted sentence, tar all holders of Union doctorates (including Rich) with one brush, and I don't think that's fair. Even if there is a problem with Union's standards, individual doctorate-holders may have filled the "hole" in their education on their own.

> Now Rich, you have this penchant to frenetically respond to those whom you think are against you.

Have you considered revising that sentence, Jimmy? For example, you could repair the missing comma (sorry, Jack), the unidiomatic construction with "penchant", the split infinitive, and the incorrect use of "whom" by writing:

Now, Rich, you have this penchant for frenetically responding to those who you think are against you.

Or how about this total rewrite?

Rich, I'm sorry for writing those hurtful remarks.