How can I be less ridiculous in future?

I suspect that the fervor and zeal is a result of a bit of a frenzy that developed in that thread. I don't hold the zeal of those who did it against them ... I think merely that it may have been more constructively directed.

If I stand up with a flaming torch on a street corner and yell, "Burn the witch!" and then everyone decides to follow, then everyone takes the responsibility of following, and I take the responsibility for "inciting a burning."

To be fair to you, Bruce, you made it clear that you chose to "out" only those with a certain category of degree, and that this did not included the merely less-than-wonderful.

And to answer to the "AFAIK" -- I assure you that I am nowhere near nuclear power. I believe strongly in disclosing limitations -- for everyone. If someone asked me to design and code a subway traffic control system, I would say No. It's in the code of ethics that I would have to say No.

I wouldn't say No because of my degrees. I would say No because I am not qualified to design a subway traffic control system, and anything that involves the lives and safety of human beings falls under the Avoid Harm to Others clause. I would, if asked to do such a task, demand that a proper PE be assigned to supervise and sign off my design.



------------------
Quinn

 

That's why I take all those BrainBench tests, BTW. I like to know exactly what my limitations are.

There is probably only a very small handful of people in CS who know as much as I do in my specialty.

Then again -- any sixteen year old with a driver's license can do something I've never been able to get over my fear of: drive.

Of 10,300 test takers at BrainBench who took the Interpersonal Communications cert. -- I scored 10th in the world.

Then again, I bet my 12 year old daughter can walk the walk and talk the talk amongst pre-teens a hell of a lot better than I can.

Of 14,000 some odd test takers who took the Telephone Etiquette exam, I scored 16th in the world.

Then again, when the phone rings, I typically don't answer it. (I hate talking on the phone.)

I've had nearly 100 poems published.

Then again, my wife has had two published (of three she's ever written), and her name is to be found in Poet's Market as an example of the kinds of poems the publication she was published in wants to see.

And so on. For every strength, I have a limitation. For every "I know how to" there are probably a few dozen things I have no clue of.

At eighteen, I knew all there was to know,
And thought enough wisdom I had to go
Upon life's road - but since then I have learned:
The more I learn, the less it is I know!

If any pleasure I shall find in death,
When my time comes, tomorrow, or far off --
"I knew nothing, nothing, nothing at all!"
To holler with all of my dying breath.




------------------
Quinn

 

Since I have received retractions et cetera privately on the matter that started me on this thread, I'm going to be exiting this particular thread now.

I may start writing more poetry -- argh -- and there's a special place in Hell for those who inflict their poetry on others.

See you in other threads,

------------------
Quinn

 

You are OK Quinn. I know the work that you did, I have had it assessed fo my purposes before it was finally presented for your award, I have read the independent opinions from learned people, and i have noted the insances where it has been cited in scoharly publications.

Ike states that it is a fake degree - Bruce to his credit classifies it fairly [maybe that is because it is you ) ]

These instances come along to test us, and you have shown many of us how to pass the test with dignity. I honour you for that.

Others who could have put very influential and positive weight to this matter, have taken the often resorted to political avenue of becoming obvious by their silence. Shame on them.

One thing it shows is, who has principles and the guts to state them and stand by them, and who would rather not take sides at this stage. it divides people into the good, the bad and the ugly, and at least the good are obvious in this instance.

Overall it makes us value those who have principle, and feel sorry for some others. Some others you just 'forget', and as Barry Foster said among his string of honourable contributions, we wonder why we bother being here.

I only came back because I was requested to by both concerned members and 'other people' I did not know but honour fraternally, over the ABC issue. I may be a stirrer and a cage rattler [sorry X & Y & Z], but I believe in justice and fairness and freedom of choice, which is more than I can say for some here. Maybe one day they'll have cause and time to reconsider their attitudes.

On the other hand maybe they'll continue as they are ... what a pity and a waste, but then some things and people will never chnage.

Peter French
Australia

 

Now you done gone and made me all teary eyed, Frenchie.

This calls for a poem ... (Special level of Hell for me it is, then.)

(Written for a poet friend of mine who was down in the dumps a bit ago...)

I had a verse to cheer you up,
I had some lines of mirth,
Some lines that said, "Friend, don't give up,
"Play life for what it's worth,"

And though indeed, 't is how I feel,
I know also the dark,
Dark place life can take a soul,
That Hell-ride through life's park.

So, though I still say don't relent,
Two up, one down abide,
And also say don't get all bent
By life's so thund'rous ride,

I also say just soak it in;
It shan't clear some day near,
Keep logs of where your soul has been
And when you read them, hear

Your voice, it's speaking to your heart,
And if you listen friend,
You'll form it into rhyming art,
And though the pain won't end

That way, you shall have shined some light,
And others, on seeing
Your woe, shall join you in your fight,
Upon your verse reading.

It's not for us to not kiss grief,
But rather to expound,
Giving to others some relief
From what grinds us to ground,

For we are poets, all of us,
Kissed by a fickle Muse,
Soul bound to apotheosis,
Translators of abuse,

And if for every two steps right
One to the left we take,
If we push forth with all our might,
Surely, we shall not break.



------------------
Quinn

 

Hey, a fellow pedestrian poet!

In addition to Einstein, Charles Hartshorne--effectively the founder of process theology, who recently passed away at age 103--never drove. (Same reason I don't, and probably the same reason you don't, either: He was afraid he'd lose his bearings at intersections.)


Cheers,

------------------
Tom Head
www.tomhead.net

co-author, Bears' Guide to the Best Education Degrees by Distance Learning (Ten Speed Press)
co-author, Get Your IT Degree and Get Ahead (Osborne/McGraw-Hill)

 

I was in a crash when I was 10. Being possessed somewhat of what is called a photographic memory (actually, it's called eidetic, but that's another story), I still, after all these years, remember the details, and lose my bearings in a car.

For me, it's as if it happened yesterday, or could happen tomorrow.

Eideticism also results in some rather funky space-time perceptions that I simply do not wish to inflict upon passengers should they flare up. (Time estimates as relate to such things as slamming on the breaks to avoid killing the neighborhood cat, the actual killing of said cat, the profuse horror of my kids upon realizing that their father couldn't drive to save a cat's life, and so on.)

It's getting better with age -- and I may, by the time I'm 103, remember it as if it were last week. ;-)



------------------
Quinn

 

Originally posted by barryfoster:


Rhetorical Questions: Are you saying that people who have fake degrees are more likely to lie?


Actually, there's an HR study that shows just that... that certain types of resume fraud (fake degrees being one type) are highly correlated statistically with dishonest behavior in the workplace of several varieties. I don't have the cite for it handy, but it shouldn't be too difficult to find... I think that I originally found the study online somewhere.


Does that mean that the "better" the degree one possess, the more ethical the person?


I think you know the answer to that one. There is a huge difference between claiming a degree from a school you know (or should know) to be fraudulent (Columbia State, Capitol U, Earlscroft, for example) and holding a degree from a second-tier but still RA school. The issue here is simple honesty.

I think that any employer who hires an employee with a phony degree -- or, for that matter, any other material misrepresentation on his or her resume -- is just asking for trouble. If an employee is willing to commit fraud to get the job in the first place, what will s/he be willing to do when the opportunity comes up to steal or otherwise take advantage of the employer?


So then, would it be safe to conclude hat people with fake degrees deserve to be publicly humiliated? Should we help speed up the humilition?

People that claim bogus degrees are defrauding their employer. The person who did honest work to earn his or her degree and didn't get the position because the fraudster got it is also harmed.

As such, I see no problem in informing the employer (particularly in positions related to public safety, health care, education, and maybe a few other fields) that they have an employee who has most likely misrepresented his or her credentials.

Keep in mind that I'm speaking of a fraudulent program, not a Cal Coast or SCUPS.

Our decisions to act are based on our assumptions and perceptions - not necessarily on objective truth.

If someone holds a Columbia State degree and is holding him or herself out as a psychologist and is giving psychological advice, the objective truth is that she is violating the law, possibly harming her patients, and knowingly doing so. It's not an assumption or perception.

I'm convinced that this path is very unhealthy. I speak because I care - for the future witch-hunt victims and for the future of this board.
[/B}

There are definite problems. But there is also a lot of potential for harm to those who are deceived by the holder of a fraudulent degree.

No one put a gun to the fraudster's head and told him or her to go to Columbia State and buy a worthless degree, and no one with an ounce of common sense would believe that one book report on a mass-market paperback book equals an accredited Ph.D. As such, the holder of the fraudulent degree knows exactly what s/he is doing, and knows the risks. Under those circumstances, I have plenty of compassion, but little to offer in the way of defending those actions. And if someone wishes to expose the fraud, well... the holder of the bogus degree knew or should have known that it was part of the risk in the first place.

 

There was a day when activists on this board (and the old AED) focused their expose' energies against those who established degree mills. Mills were shut down.

If someone entered the arena proclaiming the 'virtures' of unvirtuous programs, they were quickly dispatched - for the sake of consumer education. People learned.

Now this board has become a haven for witch hunters. Having no regard for the potential damange to individuals - nor understanding the details of why they made the choice they did - this practice will bring some headlines in the National Enquirer. But this forum will remain tainted.

"Post here, and you take a risk" is the message - loud and clear. Hide behind anonymity. Tell employers about substandard degrees holders - even if it makes no difference to job performance. Continue to defend your actions, even when a regular in the community has been placed at risk. Then move callously through life - thinking that somehow you did something good.

This is not education. This does not promote open dialogue.

While key leaders defend such practices and refuse to accept responsibilty when things backfire, this will not change.

I've been a regular since the mid-90s (1994?). I've attempted to make a positive contribution where and when I could. In light of the emerging function of this board, I can no longer participate. As I've stated in the past, I am embarrassed to even be associated as a member of the board.

For some, I'm certain this will be a relief. I don't expect any tears, nor do I expect to be much missed.

My best wishes to the individuals in community. May this board someday find it's way.

Barry Foster
Over and Out

 

While this board sometimes has a prevailing attitude or opinion among its participant, it is folly to refer to as if it were one thinking entity. That sounds like someone who didn't get his way and is mad.

While I recommend temperance in the pursuit of those who list degree mill credentials, I understand why we do it. There are only two points at which we may attack this problem: supply or demand. Well, supply doesn't work. It used to work in the past because the distribution channels were much fewer and more easily traceable. When a degree mill operator has to advertise in print and run his operation from a fixed address, he's easier to find and catch. But with the internet, this is no longer so easy. Not everyone is running a multi-million dollar sweatshop ala Pellar with Columbia State. (Even that was hard to shut down, and he didn't help himself by advertising in print ads and running the operation with physical locations in the U.S.)

No, the way to get at this is from the demand end: degree mill customers and the decision-makers that let them slide. This is done with education and awareness. Nothing heightens awareness like a little scandal. Check the President and Enron. The whole country is turning away from Afghanistan and al Queda to look at the intertwinings of the White House and Enron. Pretty powerful stuff that scandal, to take the nation's attention away despite the best spin-doctoring the Administration has to offer!

No, it's okay to go after people who publicize their degree mill credentials, representing them as real and earned. Here's where I would draw the line: if a list was obtained via search warrant from a degree mill business, I wouldn't necessarily go after the non-public figures on the list. (Public figures would get trashed, though.) But if someone posts his/her resume on the internet, if a school lists a faculty member's credentials, if a speakers' bureau lists someone's degrees in a bio/advertisement, and if any of those are degree mill degrees, then the person is fair game. If someone wants to promulgate a lie, I don't have to sit silently. The onus is on them to tell the truth, not on me to tolerate a lie.

Rich Douglas

 

The only issue remaining now is to define "degree mill". For most, this would be a degree purchased, with no work expended to earn the degree (beyond licking the stamp for postage). However, others might view a degree from SCUPS, Cal Coast or ACU as "fake" (not saying you. Indeed, you bring up some interesting points Rich.

Where do we draw the line? Where do I draw the line?

 

Barry there is not any witch hunting go on and that comparison does a disservice to the real occurences of such. At worst some loony posters sent out some silly emails. More likely someone is trying to make Degreeinfo.com look bad. Either way things like that do happen. I suppose if Quinn sent the complete emails with headers to the moderators they could follow up on that. I am not sure that would be proper for them to do. I think you may want to take a break and get a little perspective. You have made a valuable contribution and I would hope that it would be possible for you to continue to do so.

------------------
Best Regards,
Dave Hayden

 

This is not something that can be answered definitively. As Bear has pointed out in his books for more than two decades: it depends. One man's diploma mill is another man's alternative university.

That a school operates with a state license or approval isn't enough. Columbia State operated with a Louisiana license. California Pacifica was still authorized by California two years after its proprietor went to prison for operating it. Many other degree mills operate legally to this day.

If someone decided to go after a SCUPS graduate with the same zeal as others have pursued holders of Columbia State degrees, the target is in real danger. Just the accusation alone is damaging, regardless of the truth. Graduates of accredited, nontraditional degree programs face this all the time. All it takes is some idiot to say about your Union Institute degree: "Oh, he got his Ph.D. from one of those mail order schools." Getting smeared is a lot faster than cleaning up afterwards.

But these things have a tendency to find their equilibrium. No one is going to sustain a successful campaign against holders of legitimate--albeit, unaccredited--credentials. If I was a graduate of CCU, for example, I wouldn't lose too much sleep worrying about when the luddites were going to strike.

I come across things on the internet all the time that make me wince. I did a search on "Indiana Northern University" the other day, and turned up several instances where people were listing their degrees from there. Do I call the real estate office to alert the manager about the agent with the INU MBA? Naw. I couldn't care less. But you can bet the CPA I hire this year to get the IRS off my back will have real credentials. And that is the true and just campaign each member of the public should wage. Caveat emptor, fellow babies.

Rich Douglas

 

To me, this whole thread seems to be a bit of a storm in a teapot. Quin chose an unaccredited degree. Because of that choice these kinds of things are going to happen. Was the incident fair? No, but also no real harm was done either.

The problem is that the vast majority of "unaccredited degrees" are worthless. This is bound to influence the people that are knowledgable enough to know about the difference of accredited versus unaccredited. Some may not understand that there are some uses of some unaccredited degrees that are NOT fraud or dishonest.

This does not mean that I think an unaccredited degree can be equivalent to an accredited degree. Is that fair or unfair? I consider that question irrelevant, it is just the way it is. Just like a Ph.D. from first tier school is not considered equivalent to a bottom tier RA school, only the gap between accredited and unaccredited is generally far greater than within the RA system. Generally the schools are unaccredited for one of two reasons. First, they are not schools at all but are scams out to make an easy buck. Second possibility, they are schools that are inferior to accredited schools.

 

I think several observations are relevant, Barry.

I am not promoting/condoning the public humiliation/shame/destruction of character of anyone. IMO, most issues could be resolved privately.

Should those with non-accredited credentials be publically exposed? That depends! If the holder of a non-accredited doctorate (e.g., CCU, SCUPS, etc) has never misrepresented the degree, then no. If, however, someone is practicing medicine with an American College degree (Ph.D. for $200), then the matter should be addressed privately. If the matter is not resolved privately, and the person flagrantly continued to practice medicine, then yes, they should be exposed.

I also agree with Rich that the place to address this issue is two-fold--supply & demand. But to advocate a "witch hunt" is a different matter, and no, I do not advocate such.

Keep in mind that the issue of worthless credentials and non-accredited degrees is rampant in the religious community as well.
Many would be shocked to know the percentage of pastors who use the title "Dr.," yet their degree is from a degree/diploma mill.

So, regardless of the methodology one uses to address this issue, the fundamentals of civility should prevail--honesty, integrity, compassion, and I love this word, RESOLVE.

Russell

 

Thank you, Russell, for that.

In the final analysis of the question I posed in the topic name of this thread: "How can I be less ridiculous in future?" the answer is:

By being less ridiculous, Quinn.

My wife, my kids, my cat, my God all loved me before I was Dr. Quinn. Did I love myself and forgive myself as much as I ought to have for having made life decisions that led to my being in the position I was back in 1999 that flowed into my pursuing the non-accredited degrees? I ought to have, but maybe I didn't. Maybe that was, for me, what drove me so much ... to find the resolve to have compassion for my own failings, so as not to need to fulfill that youthful dream of obtaining a Ph.D.

To be 14 and on the verge of being able to attend classes at UBC, and then not following through ... surely there must have been something deep in my soul that later surfaced as insecurity, and maybe it was my deepest desire to fill that hole with the the closure that came from a Ph.D., non-accredited though it may be.

If ultimately it lands me on a list of shucksters, then I will have paid the price for my ambition, and if I am a fool, I must learn to suffer at least this one fool (myself) gladly.

I very much appreciate everyone's feedback here -- even Ike's. Now, I must rest, medidate, and return to my regularly scheduled life, a little wiser, I hope, for having shared a momentary plight with others who may be considering issues somewhat unique to themselves, but perhaps not too unlike my own.

Since you find me self-concerned,
You may loathe my flaming ego,
You might hate how I have yearned,
Cringe at my success libido,

I'll let you in
On my flaw now,
My biggest sin:
It's all for show.

Oh, I can do the things I claim,
And every tall hurdle abide,
But to me, it is all the same,
It means nothing at all inside:

It's just a list
Of that and this,
What I have missed
I just dismiss.

The string of my accomplishments
Skillfully ignores my weak spots,
Though there are no embellishments
I show the haves, not the have-nots.

Upon my wall
You shall not see
A plaque to all
That bothers me.

Before you call me arrogant,
Remember kindly, if you will,
That with my straight comes all my bent,
And it's the bent that makes life hell.

I won't pretend
To be so good,
If you extend
Me what you would.

So, if you should find me bragging,
Don't take offense at my hubris,
If humility is lacking:
Remind me I admitted this.

Sincere best wishes for all lifelong learners,



------------------
Quinn

 

Originally posted by barryfoster:
There was a day when activists on this board (and the old AED) focused their expose' energies against those who established degree mills. Mills were shut down.

And many of the same activists are still working on those same activities. Mills are still getting shut down, although it's getting a little more difficult as the mills have learned to function through 3 different continents with no physical offices and little to go on... but it's stil happening, and a lot goes on behind the scenes by a lot of different people, some working alone and some in concert with others.



Now this board has become a haven for witch hunters. Having no regard for the potential damange to individuals - nor understanding the details of why they made the choice they did - this practice will bring some headlines in the National Enquirer. But this forum will remain tainted.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Several individuals, who are not even regular posters on degreeinfo and certainly have no official connection with any degreeinfo moderation or administrative personnel, apparently sent a bunch of emails. These folks are probably not the brightest lot, since they didn't even do their homework beforehand to figure out that their target had nothing to hide.

There have been a handful of other incidents where people have trumpted their phony credentials and either held themselves out as qualified to do something when they were not, or were in high-visibility positions (professor at a regionally accredited school with a bogus doctorate, for example.)

As Rich said, if somebody publically proclaims a degree that is fraudulent, they are asking to be exposed. It's no witch hunt, and there's certainly no organized agenda to do this.


"Post here, and you take a risk" is the message - loud and clear.


Uh, no.

"Post here as an apologist for fraudulent schools and you'll get blasted" is probably a true statement.

"Post here and try to convince people that there's a valid reason to get a second-rate unaccredited degree when an accredited one is available for similar money and you'll probably get spirited disagreement" is another one.

Hide behind anonymity.

None of the regulars whose opinions are widely respected at degreeinfo post anonymously. Those who do are generally taken with a grain of salt.



Tell employers about substandard degrees holders - even if it makes no difference to job performance.


If an employee defrauded his employer during the application process, regardless of his or her job performance, s/he should be terminated. It's too big a risk for the employer, and has potential legal ramifications from an HR perspective.

Almost every employment application I've ever seen says that the employer may or will terminate an employee immediately if it is found that the employee has falsified any information on the application.



Continue to defend your actions, even when a regular in the community has been placed at risk.


If you're speaking of Quinn, your statement is incorrect. Degreeinfo admins are unified in condemning the actions of those who perpetrated the acts against Quinn, and are investigating the issue further and taking appropriate action.

However, if somebody appears and is trying to mislead others into believing that fraudulent or otherwise unaccredited programs are a viable alternative, then yes, s/he is likely to take some flack here.


This is not education. This does not promote open dialogue.


There has been open dialogue ad nauseum on the unaccredited vs accredited issue. There is probably no nuance of the issue that hasn't been debated endlessly. But the debate will continue, which is probably OK, because there are always new people coming in that need to hear the arguments and make the right choice.

But it's difficult to have much in the way of real dialogue with the degree mill apologists, since many of those that have posted have no interest in promoting education and understanding, but only in justifying their substandard degrees (that they either hold or are encouraging others to purchase) through misdirection and millspeak.


While key leaders defend such practices and refuse to accept responsibilty when things backfire, this will not change.


Again, I have no idea what you're referring to.


I've been a regular since the mid-90s (1994?).


I'm assuming you mean at a.e.d., because degreeinfo has existed only since early 2001.


I've attempted to make a positive contribution where and when I could.


And your contributions are recognized and appreciated. One can have spirited disagreement and still respect and appreciate the diversity of viewpoints.


In light of the emerging function of this board, I can no longer participate. As I've stated in the past, I am embarrassed to even be associated as a member of the board.


Barry, that's your choice and your opinion, and you're certainly entitled to hold those views. But I think you're making a mountain over a molehill. It would be a shame to lose a generally reasoned voice for the non-prevailing view over something that is really an almost nonexistent problem. I encouage you to reconsider.

 

This is real potential problem for honest unaccredited degree holders such as yourself. I believe that there's a good percentage of the people in this country that assume that unaccredited automatically equals dishonest fraud. It's an example of a little bit of knowledge being dangerous. I believe that the regular visiters here and a.e.d. generally understand the difference.

An amusing side note, I've even seen examples where people have apparently honestly "earned" a worthless degree from a degree mill. Their problem was even bigger than yours, Quinn. Everytime they wanted to prove they had earned their degree they had to pull out and present all the work that they had done. So you see it could be worse.

 

But shouldn't a large amount of the responsibility for "unaccredited = degree mill/fraud" lie on the holder? Anyone who does even a simple search realizes the vast majority of unaccredited degrees ARE fraud. Why would one choose a unaccredited degree to begin with? The cost difference is minor. IF it is a real degree the work should be close. Most of the time I believe the reason it is much easier to complete and does not require the kind of effort the real degree does. If the dream is to have a Masters or PHD why would one settle for a "waanabe" degree? The cost in defending it for the rest of your life is just too high.

------------------
Best Regards,
Dave Hayden

 

I don't know why anyone does anything -- but I do know why I do things -- or at least I figure it out sometimes with a big of meditation, and I've stated my case in that regard.

On this, my second and thirtieth year,
I take time aside for long retrospect,
Asking if now is where I did expect
To come from where I set my sails and gear
So many seas, so many leagues from here.
I survey foundations I have wrecked,
And count the scars, and all I did reject,
And try to call to mind the mortal fear
I felt at eighteen as I began this
Awesome voyage into an adult life.
And come to mind the friends I've lost to time,
And all chances I was quick to dismiss,
But somehow, I don't forget that this, of
All places I could have gone, is the sum.

There is no path I could have wandered down,
No road with better pavement to my feet,
No wife who would have made me more complete,
No other children who'd have been my crown;
For where I am is here, and not in frown,
Not in an alt'nate word or place replete
With songs and chants I never knew the beat,
This is my dimension, my harbor own,
Upon whose shores I've come to date and made
My camp, with navigation sure and thought,
No other island found my anchor's throw:
So from this point in time and space I've bade
My trip, and with my sails all flying, what
Seas ahead? Only next year's winds shall know.



------------------
Quinn