(06-23-2015, 05:48 AM)jhc7 Wrote: 1- I understand John's point of view. Nice new stage to sing and dance on. Protected from the hissing and booing of AED.

2- Chip wanted another cash cow to go with the Gay/Porn sites. He wanted to control the way the debates/wars could be held. He wanted an advantage...I can see that.

3-The gang wanted to yell without being yelled at...I can see that. I feel the gang also wanted to be seen as academics discussing DL....Can't see that. You can't make a stallion out of a jack-ass, no matter how loud it brays.

They all got something from Degree Info. Vanity/Applause, money/control, protection/academic standing??? nope.

DI was the perfect mouse trap. It lured you in and then chewed you up. You can't win a debate when the other side makes all the rules.  

(11-05-2015, 02:00 PM)nodickdoug Wrote:

Quote:I feel the gang also wanted to be seen as academics discussing DL...

 The former was done at a struggling, regionally accredited school in the U.S.

(11-15-2015, 08:27 AM)twodocdoug Wrote: BTW, here are my qualifications:

Wow, let’s change the format here.  From now on it’s “ALL DOOGLE, ALL THE TIME!”  Look what that did for DegreeDiscussion.  Oh, wait a minute…..

(11-16-2015, 01:01 PM)Armando Ramos Wrote:

(11-15-2015, 08:27 AM)twodocdoug Wrote: BTW, here are my qualifications:

Wow, let’s change the format here.  From now on it’s “ALL DOOGLE, ALL THE TIME!”  Look what that did for DegreeDiscussion.  Oh, wait a minute…..

• Doogle trashes Charisma on DD.
  
• Charisma, not realizing that Doogle is always talking out his ass and that his inane comments are simply the idle ramblings of a self-important wannabe, sues Doogle and DD.
  
• DD degenerates from stalker clusterfuck to barren wasteland.
  
• Doogle starts posting here, apparently hoping the cycle will repeat.
  

Quote:Even when they're in the right (thank you, Superior Court of Orange County), people don't like being sued.

(11-19-2015, 09:04 AM)twodocdoug Wrote:

(11-19-2015, 05:21 AM)ham Wrote:

Quote:Even when they're in the right (thank you, Superior Court of Orange County), people don't like being sued.

I personally saw all the Chip business as the pathetic mutual admiration society of a bunch of degenerate perverts, millists, fuckfaces and overall nitwits who found a gay teen pornographer who afforded them a sandbox to play the education authority.
If they had been worth their salt, the enema, gay teen porn, democratic politician, and related Thomas Chip White baloney would have been exposed since day one.
What were the authorities busy doing, beside enjoying rebates on Chip's websites?
Spurting ink like spineless squids and covering up for one another just like degree mill gangs.
Ever met a bigger clown than Janko?
I mean: he was straight out of a bad 1950s sitcom.
They don't know what "being in the right" means even when they're cramming the entire living room up their exhaust just as Chip's fairies do.
I see only thieves, mercenaries and wolves, to quote Archbishop Lefebvre.

None of that has to do with the part of my post you quoted. But to be fair, this is a thread about that person. My take: I really don't care about those people or what they do, nor can I say with any authority what is and is not true. However, to quote Carl Sagan, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." You make a lot of assessments but no assertions. Here's one piece: I am in THIS "sandbox" right now. It seems okay to me.

(11-20-2015, 01:23 AM)nodickdoug Wrote: In situations like this, it is helpful to separate the facts from the person (and his/her assessments).

It is also helpful to cite specific examples, rather than sweeping generalities.

Assertions of fact can be verified independently and, thus, are not reliant on the credibility--perceived or real--of the person offering them. Assessments are judgments about those assessments. With assessments, the credibility of the offeror should be considered.

In other words, we are entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts.

The problem with some holders of some degrees is they resent the facts and attack the person asserting them. It is a simple-minded reaction and reveals a lack of critical thinking skills.

(11-23-2015, 10:13 AM)nodickdoug Wrote: Many posters on that board have done distance degrees. Many have them in their signatures. I'm sure anyone perusing that board can determine, largely, who has done what.