Douglas Dissertation Available from UMI

It is indeed, Han. For example, they used the word "disciple" because they know I profoundly dislike it. I prefer the term "Padawan".

 

Some people really, really should not bring up what is (are)discernible and what isn't (aren't).

 

Ummm, and this post was about what?

Gus?
Dennis?
Rich?
Smiling emoticons?

Oh yes, I remember now. Rich's dissertation is now available via UMI. Congratulations, Rich! Steve's dissertation was no doubt getting lonely there in the UMI archives..........

 

Hi Vladica Russell:

Your mitre's too tight. Who last used the word (albeit misspelled) discernible? Work out your text-criticism with fear and trembling.

What all this is about, Vladica, is that there is a line between ungentlemanly behaviour, which we have come to expect from someone, and that someone's rejoicing in actual threats, hatred toward a disabled man, and not-very-veiled anti-Semitism on another forum. This person constantly displays an abscession (part abscess, part obsession) with Dr Rich Douglas and his dissertation. Therefore, he has brought not only his ungentlemanliness but his exceeding lack of, well, what would you call it in polite company? to this thread as well.

It's funny. I remember when said poster actually conducted himself fairly well. Then he let some personal spat (was that it?) and his own adoption of mill shill tactics to defend Cal Coast (poor Cal Coast with friends like that!) lead him to his present pattern of boorishness here and rejoicing in wrong elsewhere.

My attempt to see a risible side to this person has faded, frankly. So I submit to your episcopal correction on the emoticon's misplacement. This one, though, is in the right place:

Eis polla eti, Despota!

Janko

 

I started this thread with a simple note that the dissertation was available. It was to demonstrate the silliness of the conspiracy theories floated by those with no insight, few facts, and a bitter agenda. It certainly wasn't to invite the comment of one of those (Dennis), nor engage him in one of his usually weird debates. So, I will leave this thread, reflecting on my "bottom-feeder" doctorate, so named by a person pursuing one from an unaccredited school that no longer offers them. It's funny, really.


4.5K

 

I didn't realize that, I will not use it in the future. How about #2? Or #3?

 

One can't help but wonder if earning an unaccredited degree actually decreases person's intelligence. Say, Dr. Hayes's posts once used to be reasonable, if somewhat repetitive. He seemed to be an accomplished individual with vanity degree and mild denial problem. After "earning" his second doctorate, he seems to have lost a good chunk of his critical thinking skills and developed real paranoia ("RA conspiracy", "gang of six", "anti-democracy, anti-tourist Oregon ODA"). Same pattern seem to be followed by Dennis. Any thoughts?

 

ROFLMAO!

 

I don't know about reducing intelligence, but it sure can reduce one's objectivity. But not in all cases.

When I agreed to do some work with MIGS in return for free tuition (never actually used, of course), I did so with the clear understanding that (1) the degrees would be issued by the properly recognized CEU and (2) that the CEU had the authority and recognition to award these degrees. When the second of those two issues came under fire (artfully by both Bill Dayson and Gus Sainz), I fought back. But my arguments had holes in them, and it took me a long time to come to the same conclusions they had. In fact, I came to a much darker conclusion, that MIGS was going to (eventually) award the degrees, with the CEU renting its name and limited prestige to MIGS. I don't think the CEU ever had the authority to award them, and would not have. I said as much near the end, but coming to these conclusions took much longer because I had a vested interest in the outcome. Instead of being a dispassionate observer/researcher, I sought out the facts that would bolster my position and ignored (temporarily) inconvenient ones.**

All of that said, there have been many people posting on this board who've earned degrees from unaccredited schools, yet spoke about them with balance. Neil Hynde and Earon Kavanagh come to mind. So, no, I don't think the result of earning such a degree is a lessening of one's reasoning abilities. But it can result in a loss of objectivity.

**I took that lesson to heart when discussing Union's recent difficulties. I've been really critical of some of the things Union's done, but have also countered some of the more blatant accusations by people who don't know better. That's why I (and Levicoff) can speak both supportively and critically of Union.

 

Rich, yo are absolutely right, but I think you don't have to be so fair all the time and defend Denniss from my attempt at humor right away. I don't think he would do it for you!

 

No, but in the interest in being fair to anyone NOT named Dennis....

 

I agree. But shite, Stasz, that was a funny post!

 

I was referring to Gus. I have degrees.

 

:

 

I used to defend Rich endlessly until I came to the conclusion that his grief was self-inflicted and welcomed.

I guess he sees redemption in a good spanking.

 

Actually, I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong, change a viewpoint as conditions and information changes, and am willing to back up my statements whenever asked. All unfamiliar, I'm sure.

Grief? Hardly. Spanking? Certainly not from someone who doesn't have the first clue what he's talking about.

 

Or what he lacks.
Or what matters.

 

Dennis

I think my theory works. Dennis does not yet have his DBA but already finds it amusing that people can actually admit their mistakes! Watch what will happen when he'll have his doctorate (or two)! Then he'll laugh at anything. Different symptoms from Dr. Duck, same drop in IQ.

 

Re: Dennis

Why do you choose to be annoying. Mother nature didn't give the others a choice.

 

north of the borderline

A friend of mine who is an adolescent-psychiatry nurse and a colonel in the army talks about "splitting" as a feature of borderline personality disorder, in which the pt likes to set one person off against another, create absolute dichotomies, generate third party fights, etc., etc.

What we have here is borderline degree disorder, where pt with borderline degree tries to set one critic off against another by claiming that most of us are the helpless driven pawns of our foul fallen nature, while the more noble Nurse Stasz has the option of being more pleasant to the ambassador from onlinecollege, thus flattering Nurse Stasz into giving pt a break from being written up.

It doesn't work in B&M psych wards and it won't work here!