05-24-2008, 06:35 AM
Janko, Douglas and Gollin are definitely assholes, but it should take more than just chronic assholism to merit appointment to the Hall of Shame.
Janko is a very small fish. No position of responsibility in education, no DL footprint other than a minor mention in one of Bear's books, no DL teaching or administration.
He also took and has followed a principled stand on the gay boy porn issue, by leaving and not returning to DI and actively encouraging others to do the same. Definite mitigation there.
Having washed out of a traditional PhD program, he probably could be a good source of anecdotal information for others. That he doesn't share that or much other useful information in his posts actually hurts his standing for admission because he continues to reinforce his own irrelevance.
If we could catch Janko with a hooker, admitting to being a fag or operating a gay boy porn business he'd be in already. He's definitely got the personality defects, but he lacks the gravitas for it to matter.
Douglas has the same problem. He's another small timer, Bear's caddy at best, and a Levicoff wannabe.
?
Plus he actually has non-traditional learning and teaching experience. His opinions might be wrong, but they are based on some hands-on participation, not just sitting on the sidelines spouting off like Janko, Gollin, Huffman and most of the others. MIGS was a disaster, but at least he was there, foolishly jumping in with both (bare) feet. Mitigation points for sharing relevant experience and for entertainment value.
Like Janko, that great moral mishap that puts him over the top either hasn't been committed yet or hasn't been discovered.
Gollin is at the opposite end of the irrelevant spectrum. An academic, but without non-traditional or DL learning or teaching experience. No experience in non-traditional academic administration. He's an obnoxious shill for the wealthy higher education cartel, nothing more. His embarrassing family problems point out his hypocrisy, but not enough to outweigh his irrelevance.
Had the SRU thing blown up in his face that probably would have been enough to put him over the top. We still haven't seen what sort of sentence is involved there, so it may still be a factor. I'd say he has the best potential for admission to the hall, just because he seems the most likely to do something stupid enough in the future to merit it. Some day somebody he stalks is really going to hand him his lunch.
DesElms is still listed as a moderator at DI, so while he may be dormant at present he's still relevant. Plus the $40,000 hooker thing is just too funny not to be here. This is the classic moral mishap referred to above, and it was only enhanced when he tried to pass it off as "researching a book."
So my two cents worth is that we keep DesElms and continue to remain vigilant for evidence of sufficiently outrageous conduct on the part of the others. I'm sure they won't disappoint us.
Janko is a very small fish. No position of responsibility in education, no DL footprint other than a minor mention in one of Bear's books, no DL teaching or administration.
He also took and has followed a principled stand on the gay boy porn issue, by leaving and not returning to DI and actively encouraging others to do the same. Definite mitigation there.
Having washed out of a traditional PhD program, he probably could be a good source of anecdotal information for others. That he doesn't share that or much other useful information in his posts actually hurts his standing for admission because he continues to reinforce his own irrelevance.
If we could catch Janko with a hooker, admitting to being a fag or operating a gay boy porn business he'd be in already. He's definitely got the personality defects, but he lacks the gravitas for it to matter.
Douglas has the same problem. He's another small timer, Bear's caddy at best, and a Levicoff wannabe.
?
Plus he actually has non-traditional learning and teaching experience. His opinions might be wrong, but they are based on some hands-on participation, not just sitting on the sidelines spouting off like Janko, Gollin, Huffman and most of the others. MIGS was a disaster, but at least he was there, foolishly jumping in with both (bare) feet. Mitigation points for sharing relevant experience and for entertainment value.
Like Janko, that great moral mishap that puts him over the top either hasn't been committed yet or hasn't been discovered.
Gollin is at the opposite end of the irrelevant spectrum. An academic, but without non-traditional or DL learning or teaching experience. No experience in non-traditional academic administration. He's an obnoxious shill for the wealthy higher education cartel, nothing more. His embarrassing family problems point out his hypocrisy, but not enough to outweigh his irrelevance.
Had the SRU thing blown up in his face that probably would have been enough to put him over the top. We still haven't seen what sort of sentence is involved there, so it may still be a factor. I'd say he has the best potential for admission to the hall, just because he seems the most likely to do something stupid enough in the future to merit it. Some day somebody he stalks is really going to hand him his lunch.
DesElms is still listed as a moderator at DI, so while he may be dormant at present he's still relevant. Plus the $40,000 hooker thing is just too funny not to be here. This is the classic moral mishap referred to above, and it was only enhanced when he tried to pass it off as "researching a book."
So my two cents worth is that we keep DesElms and continue to remain vigilant for evidence of sufficiently outrageous conduct on the part of the others. I'm sure they won't disappoint us.