What an ass. You can't be conservative and pro-life in the academy? The tolerance and academic freedom! What was libelous and threatening, btw?
Nothing that I can reasonably discern. But then, the virtue of open discussions is that all can judge for themselves.
If I had to guess, I would say it is the fact that I had the temerity to ask why a Canadian is concerned with domestic US politics and why a person who asserts some authority in an argument as a "lady professor" logs on from home on a Wednesday afternoon. (earlier in the discussion there was an accusation that I was somehow dishonest in describing myself as a researcher--so the question was a rhetorical tit for tat).
I think you should contact his campus newspaper. Great story! Professor threatens pro-life PhD candidate for expressing his views!
I'd also email David Horowitz about this--academic freedom is one of his issues. But I understand if you don't want to get involved with all that.
It is a nice example in plain view. Let's see how many take interest in it.
I'll send and e-mail to Horowitz.
Back up the comments. His friend the "bitch" might delete them out of courtesy.
Already done--I have the pdf linked in the post.
Paul, I googled you to find your home page, poor paranoid soul.
You are entitled to express your views. You are not entitled to to disrupt discussion on a liberal web site, to taunt the host of the site, and to send threatening emails to me.
Your behavior is highly unprofessional. If the shoe was on the other foot--if I were disruptive and unprofessional on a right wing site, I'd expect to be called on it. But I don't troll conservative academic sites. It would be unprofessional to disrupt their discussions and contrary to the spirit of free enquiry--liberal values you seem to be unfamiliar with.
BTW, "I'm gonna tell David Horowitz" I understand to be threatening and an attempt to limit political speech. But it won't work--Horowitz is a busy man and this isn't exactly Ward Churchill you're dealing with.
So wally, you're saying that there shouldn't be a dialogue between conservatives and liberals (a dialogue which would be "contrary to the spirit of free inquiry?")?
That's the clear implication of your vision of a ghettoized blogposphere. ("You are not entitled to disrupt discussion on a liberal web site. I don't troll conservative academic sites.")
Wally,
Sunlight is the best disinfectant (and the best protection against extortion). I'll let everyone judge for themselves. This is a democracy whether you like it or not.
I'm anxiously awaiting the calls from my advisors to see if you made good on your threat. Although, once they investigate your claims, I doubt that I have much to fear. But I certainly caught your intent to abuse a position of authority and trust to misrepresent, threaten, and malign.
BTW Wally, the link to my homepage is in every comment I post (which you used to get to this site originally).
Wally, I am sure you're hoping the blogopshere and Horowitz are too busy to notice a crusty academic threatening to ruin a graduate student's academic hopes for no apparent reason. But you just might be mistaken. You might try an apology. Maybe you can stop this thing before it blows up in your face.
"BTW, "I'm gonna tell David Horowitz" I understand to be threatening and an attempt to limit political speech."
We don't care about your politics, Wally. Paul was happy to debate them with you without ever trying to get you fired! Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for you.
We care that you have threatened to ruin his academic career because he's a conservative. There's a word you liberals like to use, McCarthyism. Applying your logic would require that you couldn't oppose McCarthy because that would be McCarthyism.
FWIW, I did send him this before posting last night (but perhaps not in time to have saved myself the damage he was promising to inflict):
Hello;
Have you figured out that you have made a pretty big error yet? I would like to offer you the chance to save yourself some professional embarrassment.
I can give you 30 minutes to reply with your decision.
Have a nice day,
Paul Deignan
Deignan@ada-vs.com
She says she deleted comments, with at least one containing "implied" threats against her. What is she talking about? Is the full conversation contained in that PDF?
She/he is lying.
I challenge her/him to produce all correspondence and to document everything. She/he (I don't know) has made some serious accusations.
Apparently no other commenter that participated agreed with her assessment of the observation. Let's see how the discussion goes from here. I predict she/he will redouble her/his efforts.
They're going into actionable territory if they're lying about that. And with electronic communication it is easy to prove.
I am being careful to document everything. And, BTW, all documents and correspondence are available to anyone on request.
Wow! First of all, the use of the term "lunatic" is probably actionable. In addition, interference with Paul's academic career may also be, under something called "tortuous interference". I'm not a lawyer but I can use Google and I can read. Items 8 and 9 at the link may apply.
Thanks for the link Chuck.
I think the best way of dealing with lies and calumny is with truth and openness. In the end, all people must decide for themselves. We cannot demand respect; we get respect freely given and so it is a two way street. By respecting your ability to decide for yourself I might endeavor to gain your respect.
What I can do is expose this behavior. It is very common and extremely damaging to those that cannot well defend themselves. The best we can do now is as you have already done--expose them to the sunlight.
Thanks again.
I LOVE how after announcing he is going to shake things up in your academic neck of the woods he calls your email a "threat."
What are his reasons, again? Because you ventured onto a leftwing blog? Because you're pro-life (which to him means terrorist, apparently)? Because you weren't gentle with your opponents?
That's a good question for Wally. Maybe he can answer for himself.
I only delete comments for administrative reasons and I don't block participants (spammers yes, participants no--its really not for me to judge their comments. People should speak for themselves.)
Just my own opinion but I think everyone should step back and let this die a natural death. While it is easy to be drawn into bickering (myself included), I think it diminishes the ability of the impartial observer to respect either side.
I am not attempting to choose sides or to diminish the emotions stirred by the situation but I don't think either weblog is the proper venue for such a "battle". It tends to look like a fight amongst children.
You may have recourse...she/he may retaliate...etc, etc but I think that such issues ought to be resolved off line. Correct me if I am wrong, but the purpose of both weblogs is to offer commentary, opinion, and ideas.
That said, may I suggest everyone both go back to their corners and recommit themselves to their intended purposes.
That would have been a good idea before the damage was done.
Unfortunately, today I did confirm that Hettle defamed me to my advisors (the fellows who give recommendations or not) and of course to the community. Now, corrective action is called for, to wit, a public apology and retraction.
If we have that, then we can "move on" to productive discussions where mutual respect for disparate opinions is the norm.
"It tends to look like a fight amongst children."
Sadly, it is not. Wally threatened Paul's professional life. What would you do, Daniel? I don't think Paul has any reason to take this one on the chin and call it a day. A bully is a bully. I might have some sympathy if Paul actually demonstrated temperment issues. But he has not. In fact, the thread is a testament to his patience and civility. He was called an arrogant sexist, and a fascist. What did Paul do? Not much, considering. Read the thread!
You both missed my point! It may well be a legal matter (I said "you may have recourse") but fighting the battle here on your weblog does what for you Paul? I guess I fail to see your reasoning.
If you do contact an attorney, I am certain his first advice will be to zip it...but far be it for me to give YOU any advice. I also don't see how this approach will help your cause with your advisors...but again that's just my opinion.
And Hans, as I clearly stated, I am NOT taking sides so asking me "What did Paul do?" would seem to indicate I made an accusation. I merely said that this didn't seem to me to be the proper venue to conduct such a battle. I have read every single word of the thread...that's exactly WHY I decided to make my comments. YOU should read my comments before you take me to task. As to what I would do, I think my remarks are quite clear in that regard.
Anyway, I, on the other hand will seek out other blogs. And not to worry, I also won't be writing any further remarks here so you may both have the last word. Enjoy!
Perhaps someone could explain what commentary, opinion, and ideas are? I thought they were periods when an individual wrote on a subject that interested him/her, expressed thoughts that were generated by him to explain the subject that he/she was writing on. Ideas could be covered under the classification of opinion. Where were those criteria not met on this thread?
If the shoe was on the other foot--if I were disruptive and unprofessional on a right wing site, I'd expect to be called on it.
What a jerk!
Hey Wally, being "called on it" is one thing--one NORMALLY RESPONDS with a counterargument when "calling" someone on it. Going and telling the teacher (threatening the opponent's livelihood) is not "calling" someone on it. That's just insane!
Wally, you sound like the poster child for all that is wrong in academia. God forbid someone actually disagree with A Tenured Professor! You know everything, don't you, and if anyone disagrees, they shouldn't BE a student or in academia, right?
By the way, it's not "trolling" when a commenter leaves his full ID with the comment; it's trolling when you make a drive-by comment with fake ID. When one leaves his ID with the comment, it's generally because there's an interest in HONEST DISCUSSION--obviously a concept totally foreign to you.
Did it ever occur to you that your behavior might not be considered appropriate by your peers or university administration? You may have tenure, but one usually at least cares about his or her reputation. Of course, you may be the sociopath that you resemble, so maybe not.
Paul, it's interesting that the most psychotic commenters, the ones who make the dumbest comments (what does "homely" have to do with anything?) and do the most Real Life harassment, are almost ALWAYS university professors. I've seen it all over the blogosphere. It says a lot about what kind of people make up academia and live in the blogosphere--social and civic retards.
See, the sad thing about a guy like you is, in 50 years you're gonna start doin' some thinkin' on your own and you're going to come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life: one, don't do that, and two, you dropped 150 grand on a f***in' education you could have got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library!
--Good Will Hunting
How ya like them apples?
Thanks for the laugh 'Bama. Still chuckling. Seen this? (relevant)
http://boortz.com/more/commencement.html
Dan,
The problem was that I don't know and cannot know what damage Hettle did in maligning me to my advisors. Here I force him out into the open where I have an even playing field.
Also, it sets an example. I want people on both sides to get the benefit of the ten grand I'm about to spend (maybe more). I think enough is enough.
Now Paul, of course you were asking for trouble. They wanted to discuss how to oppose Alito and you wanted to discuss whether to oppose Alito. Trying to get them to go back and reexamine their conclusions. They were done, they'd moved on to the next thing.
They didn't like Alito's decisions and you wanted them to look at how he arrived at them. They care about results, not process. Process isn't instant gratification. It requires that you take the long view and sometimes accept a decision you don't like. That's the behavior of adults. Silly.
I'm not sure why you went to the trouble. THe far left is powerless. All they can do is shake their fists in a vacumn. You can't change their minds and you don't have to because they can't effect anything in the real world.
Well, what's done is done. I look forward to watching the progress of your lawsuit. My totally selfish side hopes Wally doesn't apologize and you spend the next two years nailing him to the wall (metaphorically speaking).
I guess I should retract part of that--obviously they do have one power. The power to tattle. Which is the power of a child.
Interesting and scary tale, Paul. I hope you don't mind but I emailed Dr. Mike Adams with the bare bones of the tale - from http://bamapachyderm.com/archive...-crush-dissent/
which is where I began reading this. I thought he might find it stimulating. He seems to have fun Bear-Baiting the Lefties. LOL
Good Luck and Hang Tough!
I know a few people have mentioned Horowitz (who really is a good guy, met him last spring), but you might want to try FIRE too, if things get bad. They have a legal defense fund and will help with any court battles that may come up. I'm not a lawyer (yet) but I think putting this up in public is smart. Monsters only live in the dark. Take care, Paul. Things'll work out. 
FIRE is excellent.
Thanks all.
I'm going to bankroll this one myself. With the prevalent abuse in our academies, I think FIRE and Horowitz probably have more than they can handle.
I do have a very good attorney (argues and wins cases to Judge Posner). Let's see how it goes.
Having no dog in this fight, and given that a good chunk of the purported evidence has been erased, all I can say is "Go Boilers".
Slartibartfast
BSEE '83
Solidarity, from another soul outnumbered in academia.
You mean to say that bitchPHD and her boneheaded commenters considered THAT to be "trolling"? You're kidding! How do they function in the real world? Have they managed to create a mystical ivory tower where everyone worships the ground they walk upon, and any nasty rational opposing arguments can be banned as hate speech?
I love teaching college students, but there's no way I'd ever put up with the ignorant and malicious professors that seem to infest universities these days.
If anyone can provide a non-pdf link to a copy of the deleted thread, I would appreciate it. My computer freezes trying to open pdf.
Thanks and good luck. This is just nauseating, and the guilty parties seem to be rejoicing in having intimidated a student. College sure has changed since the 'free speech movement' acquired administrative power. Honestly, it makes me sick to my stomach to know these type of vindictive bullies are teaching our young adults how to respond to differing opinions.
Very cool to have all this documented Paul. I am saving your post in my folder of left wing efforts to slam the doors of academia against those who take contrary views. (Yes, they apparently DO think that ME's move on to academia. I think they cannot imagine anything else.)
Can electronic folders "bulge"?
Hang in there buddy.
Hey Alec!
Good to hear from you. I visit your blog every so often (it is extremely underread).
mikem,
There are a couple links in the post to comments. Last I checked the links were still ok.
Paul: Thanks. So what is My VRWC referring to? "Bitch PhD has deleted all traces of the above from the comment thread."
Is that a mistake or are there relevant comments missing from your link to the site?
This seems like a cut and dry case of improper intimidation. I would expect academics to be horrified at the actions of Professor Hettle. I am very much interested in seeing how other online academics respond to his bullying tactics. Hettle himself seems to be quite pleased with his idea of academic principles, threatening students.
Incredible, and shameful.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com...NEWS10/
41209004
Wonder what happens if you put his name in there?
GA,
The text of the 11th makes clear that citizens should be able to sue their own state. Han was wrongly decided.
Mikem,
I think it was a mistake. Only some comments were deleted--mostly one-liners like advice on how to filter IP's or that haloscan now has moderation.
(Wally's friend is not a technical expert).
Thin skinned those leftys. Go Paul.
Hans,
You can't be conservative and pro-life in the academy? The tolerance and academic freedom!
That's nothing.. of course you can't. You haven't seen the really bad ones, people that think you can't possibly have any mental ability and still have any conservative beliefs whatsoever.
These people tend to think that you're only conservative if you're a dumb hick, and if you're in a college still holding those views, you're likely going to fail (hence the numerous mentions of "if" he finishes he PhD or not).
It's amazing how closed-minded the supposed "enlightened," "progressive," "open-minded" academics tend to be.
Hey Paul,
Good luck in all of this. I read through most of the PDF. Amazing. You weren't out of line in any way, but because you didn't adhere to their viewpoint, you're considered a troll.
Is there really a point in having a discussion if all of your readers are just going to agree with you and give you warm fuzzies?
Great work, Paul. I agree 100%. Keep up the good work!
I am sort of a mirror of Paul, liberal commentator on mostly conservative sites -- often accused of being a troll.
Assuming Paul's pdf accurately represented the conversation, I probably don't write as well or as politely as Paul.
Best of luck Paul, trolls are not (necessarily) a bad thing at all.
Go after Wally for all it is worth. I am a liberal, but I cannot stand these intarweb echo chambers (that I mostly find on conservative sites). Leave Bitch Phd alone. She is mostly worthless and the Intarweb needs as much anonymity as possible, so going after her identity is definite bad thing. (Though I do congratulate you for the cajones to post in the open yourself.)
Commenting by HaloScan
