Bill Ackman forgives wife for plagiarism

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I do not understand in the slightest why this person is saying Oxman’s plagiarism was worse. Gay’s was far more extensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I do not understand in the slightest why this person is saying Oxman’s plagiarism was worse. Gay’s was far more extensive.

At least Gay didn’t plagiarize from Wikipedia. I mean, that’s literally middle school-level plagiarism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is no longer a university professor nor is she a president of any university. Embarrassing? Yes Impactful to anyone other than her? No

Her doctoral dissertation should be rescinded and therefore her doctoral degree as well. She will be a fake doctor just like Jill.

And you want Gay’s revoked too? So Gay then loses any ability to work in academia? Please clarify.

Por supuesto

Okay, that’s a reasonable position to take, then.

Look, no one is denying that Gay is a plagiarist. It’s just that whomever is chasing down these cheaters must have a clean slate themselves. If the wife of this dude is a plagiarist, he may not be in the best position to judge.

Everyone in academia knows that everyone makes insignificant paperwork errors like these two. The bad faith media conflates misplaced quotation marks with copying a whole research result.

Undergrad teens are expelled or at the very least suspended for one year for doing what his wife is credibly accused of.

In the other thread we were repeatedly told by Gay’s defenders that Harvard undergraduate students were never expelled or suspended for plagiarism like Gay’s. So, I’m a little suspicious that far less plagiarism than Gay would cause a suspension or expulsion.

This was almost 30 years ago, standards were higher then.

No, the posters were saying that students now would not be expelled for plagiarism like Gay’s. In other words, they were defending Gay by saying that students now wouldn’t be expelled for the same offenses, so it’s wrong for Gay to be forced to resign. If that’s true, there is no way they’d be expelled for plagiarism like Oxman’s, which was nowhere near as extensive as Gay’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This guy came across as a bona-fide plagiarism vigilante as recently as last week.

I've already seen some people claim this is a nothing burger - but Ackman himself went out of his way to forgive her on Twitter...

“Part of what makes her human is that she makes mistakes, owns them, and apologizes when appropriate”

He is so unhinged on twitter all weekend. He sure isn't a fan of getting a taste of his own medicine.

He's certainly not very mature or self-restrained. I can't believe he doesn't employ or listen to a PR expert who can help him manage his tweets and public response better. I guess when you're that rich you don't really care--except that he does care and very much wants to control the narrative.

He wants to tell everyone what to think and believe, no matter the truth.

People like that are dangerous megalomaniacs.

Sounds like 99% of DCUM posters.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I do not understand in the slightest why this person is saying Oxman’s plagiarism was worse. Gay’s was far more extensive.

At least Gay didn’t plagiarize from Wikipedia. I mean, that’s literally middle school-level plagiarism.

Okay, but who cares about the source? It’s the act that matters. Defenders of Gay seem to be making the mind-blowing argument that Gay’s far more extreme plagiarism was somehow okay because she plagiarized other academics while Oxman’s was not okay because the source was Wikipedia. That’s absolutely bananas. Talking about a pretzel!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I do not understand in the slightest why this person is saying Oxman’s plagiarism was worse. Gay’s was far more extensive.

+1
And who on earth is "King Tampon" and why should we care what s/he has to say about... anything?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This guy is everything wrong with the world and a prime example of how money corrupts the mind and the soul. He demonstrates zero intellectual or moral consistency in his positions, and DEI only matters to him if it's about antisemistism but not for anyone else. Other than his Judaism he is your basic privileged rich white guy who thinks he is smarter than everyone else and that the world should revolve around him. It's only a matter of time before he runs for office as Trunp 2.0.

He is white, male, and rich, what does his religion have to do with his obnoxious stance?

My point obviously is that he uses his status in a minority religion as a convenient cudgel and to justify his behavior.

Would you say the same about a wealthy black donor who decided to speak up and refuse to continue donating upon the discovery that the university had no problem with protesters screaming ugly things about black people and allowing black people to be harassed? We'll wait while you twist yourself into a pretzel, trying to answer.
DP

Ackman didn't just speak up and withhold donations. He basically said Gay was only hired bc of DEI considerations, stirred up an online mob against her for plagiarism and is now using his wife's outing to go after an entire university faculty. He's not principled and I am not twisting myself into a pretzel. But he sure is.

Why are you defending this guy? He's quite repugnant for a variety of reasons.

How unsurprising that you didn't even answer the question posed to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s nice that Bill forgave his wife for directly plagiarizing Wiki articles. I wonder if his first wife forgave Bill for ruining their family?

I guess you still haven't gotten the message that he and his first wife divorced THREE YEARS before he even met his second wife? And the divorce was amicable, according to both of them? But do continue spinning your unhinged speculative fiction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s nice that Bill forgave his wife for directly plagiarizing Wiki articles. I wonder if his first wife forgave Bill for ruining their family?

You realize that all these repeated weird assertions about the private lives of the Ackman family make normal readers of the thread sympathetic to his cause? You come across as deeply strange.

+100

[Anonymous]

MIT should simply ignore Ackman. His views are irrelevant to MIT. Don't respond to him. Who cares what he thinks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If what Ackman describes in this tweet below is true, the BI processes should be reviewed:

https://x.com/billackman/status/1743792226591723914

That’s appalling reporter behavior, if it’s true. Of course I am not believing either BI or Ackman on this matter. But if Ackman is accurate, that is pretty awful reporter behavior.

[Anonymous]

Oh FFS, it’s so goddamned obvious why the few lining up to defend Oxman are doing so. Racism and tribalism are alive and well!

[Anonymous]

Neri Oxman is super hot!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh FFS, it’s so goddamned obvious why the few lining up to defend Oxman are doing so. Racism and tribalism are alive and well!

The few? Reads like a full blown choreographed cyber campaign. Not organic, big money and influence. All the favors being called in. Because he stepped in it and now his wife is exposed as a lightweight pseud ditz. Sooo freakin’ funny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh FFS, it’s so goddamned obvious why the few lining up to defend Oxman are doing so. Racism and tribalism are alive and well!

The few? Reads like a full blown choreographed cyber campaign. Not organic, big money and influence. All the favors being called in. Because he stepped in it and now his wife is exposed as a lightweight pseud ditz. Sooo freakin’ funny.

The few, here.