First question to Henrik re-Knightsbridge University

I was not one of the four that requested copies. I have already stated that I am very welling to grant Dr. Hayes any possible benefit of any doubt and agree that his dissertation is in fact the masterpiece that has been claimed. As long as I don't have to read it. If he makes me read it then I would have to admit that my opinion is irrelevant since I know very little about ducks and care even less about ducks. Now please don't misunderstand me, I think ducks are fine and it is great that people are interested enough in ducks that they want to study them and write about them. I'm just not interested.

 

Gus,
I appreciate that, as with many dissertations, the subject material is of no great interest to the majority. Although I can guarantee that even the non-interested duck person will find much of what I have to say in the dissertation on brown teal of considerable enlightenment. Particularly from the documentational aspects about how our European ancestors brought death and destruction to New Zealand's endemic wildlife.
Another point is that the disseratation does in fact show is that unaccredited dissertations can have value.
In addition to this the real value has been that in its published form the disseratation has been well received by NZ senior politicians, Dept of Conservation officials and many others throughout the world who believe in attempting to preserve some of the important aspects of nature.
"Duck Boy' in 'paradise'.

 

I don’t believe you answered my question. I didn’t ask you what you thought the value was. You continually lament that the members of this forum don’t want to read your masterpiece. In light of that, I simply asked why we should.

I must point out, however, that there is no such thing as an “unaccredited dissertation.” Dissertations are not accredited. Moreover, I do not believe that anyone has argued that a dissertation would be rendered valueless if submitted to an unaccredited institution or even a degree mill. Conversely, a school would not be rendered credible or even legitimate based on a single dissertation; it’s the minimum standards that are significant. If important and legitimate work resulted in a fraudulent degree, the more is the pity.

 

Gus,
In simple English - you might learn something by reading about the NZ Brown Teal, as well as broadening your mind!

 

Here is a summary, from my perspective.
A member posts a message that includes an ethnic slur. While it is clearly not aimed at me personally, it denigrates my ethnic heritage. As I have been raised to stick up for myself, I do not hesitate to do so. It might be argued that I could have been more prudent in my choice of words but when insulted I do not tend to respond with prudence. It might be argued that "he didn't know what he was saying," as if this is supposed to make me feel better. In any case, I said what I said. Next, two other members rush in to assure me that no harm was intended. How they can know this is unclear. Still a bit heated I tell them this. Again, it might be argued that I could have been more prudent in my choice of words. Next, I am being criticized for standing up for myself. All this time I am still trying to understand why these two have rushed to the defense of Fyrst, without even waiting for his response. They are convinced of his innocence before he has said a word.

I am willing to consider the idea that my words were poorly chosen. I am even willing to consider that my perceptions were off. I am not, however, willing to withdraw my objection to the slur. If this means that Fyrst withdraws from this forum I can only think that we are all the better for it. The fact that he has failed to comment in any way does not help his case. He will, no doubt, post a message at some point saying, "blah blah blah, I was so busy, blah blah blah" In the end it really doesn't matter. As Gus has rightly pointed out, there are far bigger problems in the world.

Three final points:
Gus - the hard part for me is that I think you've been on the right track with Fyrst. He's slippery, evasive and, at times, charming. I've had some considerable experience with people who are charming, slippery and evasive and so perhaps I'm quicker to make up my mind.
Charles - I'm sorry you don't understand.
Finally, while I try not to do it deliberately, I reserve the right to make an ass of myself from time to time. To me, it's part of being human and being alive. I'd rather be a bit "out there" than be one of "duck boys" silent, sniveling 4000 - too afraid of their own shadows to speak up.
Jack

 

The question was why we should read something that we know beforehand doesn’t interest us. Time is precious and there are so many interesting things to read and learn. Just because we might learn something, Dr. Hayes, doesn’t seem to be sufficient reason, as almost anything can be deemed a learning experience.

Moreover, what, precisely, do you mean by “broadening your mind?” My interests are quite eclectic, and I don’t see how focusing on such an extremely narrow topic as the NZ Brown Teal would significantly expand my horizons. More importantly, what do you expect to gain by having us read your dissertation? You seem to have a particular agenda that you feel would be furthered by having us reading your masterpiece, however, for the life of me, I can't imagine what that could be.

 

Gus,
How can you claim to have an eclectic mind? when you seem to have a closed one most of the time!
I gain nothing from you reading the brown teal piece. It is you that would benefit - quite considerably. You would be a much wiser person who might then be able to claim a partially 'eclectic mind'.
'Duck Boy' in 'paradise'.

 

Personally, I'm not at all interested in trying to validate the quality of work done at an institution not willing to do the same for itself. Also, I am hardly qualified to judge your work. But because of the nature of the issuing institution, I am free to (and confident to) ignore its veracity.

As for the rest of my comment, it wasn't directed at Henrik. It was directed at your flame and its irrelevance.

 

Why would you characterize me as having a closed mind? I would wager that I have experimented with and experienced many more strange and wonderful things than you. The fact that one maintains an informed opinion that happens to disagree with yours does not mean that one’s mind is closed.

Moreover, I suggest you look up the word “eclectic” in a good dictionary. It does not mean open and accepting of all and everything. On the contrary, it means exercising judgment and selecting what seems best of various styles or ideas.

Once again, I do not believe that your masterpiece would make me wiser or make me less close-minded. At best, it might provide me with some information concerning the NZ Brown Teal—information, I might add, in which I have no interest or for which I have no use.

I am sure you have written a fine manual, but as you have now admitted that this does not prove anything as it relates to distance learning or a particular institution, I would suggest you save your hyperbole for a forum where they might actually care about your dissertation and the NZ Brown Teal. Despite your protestations, interest on this forum is nil. Give it a rest, Dr. Duck Boy.

 

Quite obviously, Gus, Rich, Jack and a few others posting on this thread have already forgotten why the matter of my dissertation was raised!
As I've stated before, you RA Apologists are all tarred with the same brush - disagree with any of you, or make a comment that is contrary to your close-mind mentality, and the abuse starts.
I thought Dr Rich had mended his ways, obviously once it has been proven that a closed-mind exists any thing after is purely cosmetic, and nothing really changes.
In summary it is now quite difficult for me to find anything positive to say about you 1/2 dozen RA Apologists, or your treatment of Henrik - and myself.

 

"Finally, in conclusion, let me just say this."
—Peter Sellers

 

Warning: The following statement is made without authority or credential from Jack Tracey or anyone else in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Not once did I imply that I had any certainty of what was in Henrik's mind. You might review my initial input. I began my statements with words like:

I'm sure Henrick can speak for himself, ....

I read his post ...

I'm guessing Henrick's ....

Regardless of what was in Henrik's mind, I'm still wondering how any reasonable person could find hate speech in his silly little pun.

Are you offended by the emblem of Ireland?

 

"RA Apologist" is a non sequitur.

As for "abuse," you should re-read your posts.

"My ways" are not for you to pass judgment on; you're incapable.

Go back and read what I said; I made no personal comments about you. I suggested that you flamed others, and I rejected the notion of reading someone's dissertation (giving two reasons). You, on the other hand, persist in using people's names, insulting them, then whining when they don't acknowledge your work.

 

Why is it when people disagree with your opinion THEY are closed mided? It is you F.N. that chose a U.S. business that is little more than a degree mill. What ever the quality of your N. Z. Brown Teal report, it says nothing about the policies and value of a K-W "degree". I wish you well but you seriously need to rethink how emotional your thinking is.

 

Wow! I am going to agree with Gus.

I do not care about the brown teal either, but the above is the same argument I made about taking some of the fluff courses in a degree program. Time is precious, and making me study tuvan musicians, and literature just because I might learn something does not give me a sufficient reason. Very well said Gus.

Scott

 

I'm sure Henrik wasn't attempting any real insult, but was rather just making a little pun, a little nip at the heel. The type of remark that goes back and forth between folks all the time. Being part, Irish-English (Cherokee- Native American) I get caught all the time by some form of humor. Almost all of it meant as fun and not as a sincere attack, you learn to laugh it off. I've told Indian jokes- Irish jokes- English jokes and many others. Sometimes we all go a bit too far, but rarely do we mean to cause pain. I feel that in no way did Henrik mean more than a little tickle of the rib, a gentle nudge.

 

What do harps, brown teals and hurt feelings have to do with Henrik and Knightsbridge?

 

Ego, ego, ego, and ego.

 

There is, however, a big difference between what one reads and studies for personal edification and what is (rightfully so) required for a degree. The institution conferring the degree has the responsibility to ensure that the degree actually represents that the individual to whom it was conferred actually was educated to a minimum standard. As such, it has the right (or perhaps better said, the obligation) to insist that a student take a certain number of courses in specific disciplines. Within those disciplines, the student has a certain amount of free choice regarding which courses to take. The only time you are allowed to freely design your own curriculum and determine degree requirements is when you purchase your degree from a mill.

I don’t understand your continual crusade against what you term “fluff” courses. It is precisely these courses that define the difference between an institution of higher learning and a vocational school. You also repeatedly complain about having to take these “fluff” courses. When did you do so? You have lauded K-W for not requiring any. Moreover, I have examined the curriculum for your ASEET degree, Aside from two Psychology courses (Human Relations I and II), I did not see any courses that could be construed as “fluff” (the curriculum may have changed since you graduated). In fact, the only general education courses were Communications, Physics, and Math, and these were all “integrated” courses, which means that these courses were geared exclusively toward the major. (This also means that the transferability of these courses to a four-year institution to satisfy general education requirements is questionable, at best.)

So where are all these “fluff’ courses you are complaining that you had to take? Were the four courses you took at Clemson all “fluff” courses? Are courses like Music Appreciation (which you have repeatedly stated you had to take) what you chose to take from their vast offerings during your brief stint there? Could it be that, after looking into the matter, you find yourself in the position of having to take these kinds of courses (or perhaps even general education courses because those from your AS degree will not transfer) if you want to earn a real Bachelors degree? Is that what’s bugging you?

 

As usual in my case Gus you do not know what you are talking about. You assume a lot don't you. All of my general education courses will transfer to any institution because I took the college transfer general ed. courses instead of the ones required by my two year degree program. I have had English 101, and 102, PSY. 201 and 203, MUS 105, Macroeconomics, Microeconomics, University Physics 221, 222. and 223. All the math courses were college transfer instead of the ones you mentioned. If you want I will list them for you. The courses I had at Clemson were upper level undergraduate. Graduated the ASEET with a 4.0. I also have a 3.5 at Clemson, and a 3.5 at KW. I know you dispise KW, but I found it much harder than anything I had taken elsewhere.

Your argument above fits right in with my thesis on a screwed up educational system. The difference is that I have to pay to study something that has nothing to do with my vocation, and brings no interest to me. I may have a little more on one side of my brain, but I do not think it is right to force someone to study something that has nothing to do with their vocation. You do not want to read about Mr. Hayes's brown teal, and I do not want to study about Bosnian ganga singers, Van Gogh, or poetry. What is the difference? I complain about this as my opinion while knowing I am not going to change anything. Ah but if I could.

Scott