Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gay is only the tip of the iceberg. The right is going to start going after professors and administrators with whom they disagree by using software to comb through their research looking for errors and plagiarism. Buckle up.

I totally agree that the right is going to use this incident to go after even more professors, especially ones of color. But they should remember that the anti-plagiarism software doesn't care about politics--it can also find plagiarism in the work of right-leaning academics.

Not a problem. Especially given that there's, what, 50 left wing academics for every 1 right wing academic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things can be true at the same time:

1. Gay was targeted by right-wing media because she is a black woman
2. Gay is a plagiarist and needed to resign

She plagiarized over and over again, many times beyond just boilerplate language. This shows an intent to deceive, which then calls into question her data and all her scholarship.

This makes me very sad, especially for all the women of color in academia who Claudine Gay was supposed to represent.

Read the story of Priyanga Amarasekare, who remains suspended at UCLA and no one will say exactly why.

https://www.chronicle.com/article/when-a-professor-disappears-and-no-one-will-tell-you-why
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00473-8

So she’s being pushed to the brink of sanity and her students’s opportunities destroyed because of protocol in the wake of complaining about discrimination - literally nothing to do with her scholarship, her publications, her research, her cites, her mentorship. Some piece of shit chancellor is mad at her and wants her destroyed. May that chancellor get it back twentyfold in this lifetime.

Why are you so defensive of Claudine Gay?

Three things are indisputable:

1. She plagiarized, heavily.

2. Her academic output is mediocre to bad, especially considering she received tenure at Stanford and Harvard. Her academic output is *worse* than what you'd expect of a community college professor. Just articles, no published books, and a data set she won't release even when peer reviewers said the data couldn't be verified and asked to see it, 20 years ago. It's blatantly obvious that Gay *only* got tenure and rose through the ranks because she was a black woman. A white version would still be a visiting adjunct professor at a local regional state university. She grifted her way to the top, and one can still respect her for playing her cards brilliantly, but a grift is still a grift.

3. As dean at Harvard, she badly handled several high profile investigations into certain faculty. Google Roland Fryer (black male, btw) out of what seemed like no more than ideological spite and visceral hatred of someone whose research disputed her beliefs.

Tell us, please, why Gay is so important to you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gay is only the tip of the iceberg. The right is going to start going after professors and administrators with whom they disagree by using software to comb through their research looking for errors and plagiarism. Buckle up.

I totally agree that the right is going to use this incident to go after even more professors, especially ones of color. But they should remember that the anti-plagiarism software doesn't care about politics--it can also find plagiarism in the work of right-leaning academics.

Same rules for everyone -- it's quite a concept.

This Gay thing became surreal once students realized, wait, does this mean we can finally plagiarize at will? Let's do it!!!!

Anonymous wrote:Gay is only the tip of the iceberg. The right is going to start going after professors and administrators with whom they disagree by using software to comb through their research looking for errors and plagiarism. Buckle up.

I totally agree that the right is going to use this incident to go after even more professors, especially ones of color. But they should remember that the anti-plagiarism software doesn't care about politics--it can also find plagiarism in the work of right-leaning academics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is keeping her near million dollar salary. Give me a break. She will be paid to do even less each year.

This is exposing Harvard and DEI to global ridicule.

Had to happen at some point.

Among the Ivies, Harvard is not unique in its extreme submission to the DEI / woke / CRT philosophy.

In addition, the Ivies and most other universities have moved the philosophy into hiring practices:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/94-jobs-added-by-major-companies-in-2021-went-to-people-of-color/ar-AA1hpsh3

Hasn’t this radicalism gone too far?

It has. And let's hope this marks the Peak of Insanity.

Signed,

Minority

Why should I care about this?

If I were Gay, I would hire a team to dig through every former Dean's academic writings.

I hope they find nothing. But if they do find plagiarism, that could potentially shift the discussion.

^ the above is to address Ackman and his scummy ilk publicly insisting that Gay was always a bad candidate and a pure DEI hire. Even for the most conservative, if you’re actually remotely honest about what you want an educational institution to provide its students, it’s worth not being completely knee-jerk about this.

I will also note that the right-wing spin on what would happen to Gay were she a student is likely a lie. I am close with an attorney who works for an Ivy as an investigator where there are student issues escalated to the deans for disciplinary action, and according to them the typical correction would be some kind of rebuke, a potential temp suspension, not expulsion. Another friend is a tenured professor at a different Ivy, and is also a WOC. She’s frustrated by the lack of discussion about how the burdens of mentorship and teaching are distributed to WOC, so that the “rockstars” who trend white and male are unimpeded with their own personal publications and research. There’s nuance in this, not that that could ever matter to the “2 down 1 to go” crowd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a good piece explaining why the plagiarism issue is so serious (and apparently a longstanding problem at Harvard in terms of the disparity between how students and professors are treated): https://newrepublic.com/article/177814/claudine-gay-resignation-plagiarism-israel

There have also been good opeds in the NYT and WashPost on similar themes. It's deeply unfortunate that Gay's resignation will fuel more backlash against free speech and more obnoxiousness by wealthy alumni and donors. But the original sin was Harvard's board elevating someone as president who was not well qualified for the role and for failing to do basic due diligence on her. And what's really unfortunate is that there are more than a few highly qualified women and/or people of color who would have been great candidates - and some may be hesitant to throw their hat into the ring after the sh*tshow of the past few months.

White people have been stealing from Black people for hundreds of years without proper attribution. Suddenly, it's a problem?

Plagiarism has always been treated seriously in academia since time immemorial. Rule #1 has always been you just do not plagiarize. History is littered with academics who violated this role and paid the price for it.

Your bitter chip on your shoulder and invented angst to defend Gay is only making Gay seem worse because you're saying Gay should avoid being penalized because she needs to be protected as a black woman.

Anonymous wrote:Two things can be true at the same time:

1. Gay was targeted by right-wing media because she is a black woman
2. Gay is a plagiarist and needed to resign

She plagiarized over and over again, many times beyond just boilerplate language. This shows an intent to deceive, which then calls into question her data and all her scholarship.

This makes me very sad, especially for all the women of color in academia who Claudine Gay was supposed to represent.

Read the story of Priyanga Amarasekare, who remains suspended at UCLA and no one will say exactly why.

https://www.chronicle.com/article/when-a-professor-disappears-and-no-one-will-tell-you-why
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00473-8

So she’s being pushed to the brink of sanity and her students’s opportunities destroyed because of protocol in the wake of complaining about discrimination - literally nothing to do with her scholarship, her publications, her research, her cites, her mentorship. Some piece of shit chancellor is mad at her and wants her destroyed. May that chancellor get it back twentyfold in this lifetime.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gay is only the tip of the iceberg. The right is going to start going after professors and administrators with whom they disagree by using software to comb through their research looking for errors and plagiarism. Buckle up.

If only it wasn't so easy to expose the grifters and fakes.

Yes with Trump you need a hard hat to avoid being hit by all the low hanging fruits exploding with overwhelming evidence about his fake grifting …

Anonymous wrote:Gay is only the tip of the iceberg. The right is going to start going after professors and administrators with whom they disagree by using software to comb through their research looking for errors and plagiarism. Buckle up.

If only it wasn't so easy to expose the grifters and fakes.

Two things can be true at the same time:

1. Gay was targeted by right-wing media because she is a black woman
2. Gay is a plagiarist and needed to resign

She plagiarized over and over again, many times beyond just boilerplate language. This shows an intent to deceive, which then calls into question her data and all her scholarship.

This makes me very sad, especially for all the women of color in academia who Claudine Gay was supposed to represent.

Read the story of Priyanga Amarasekare, who remains suspended at UCLA and no one will say exactly why.

https://www.chronicle.com/article/when-a-professor-disappears-and-no-one-will-tell-you-why
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00473-8

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a good piece explaining why the plagiarism issue is so serious (and apparently a longstanding problem at Harvard in terms of the disparity between how students and professors are treated): https://newrepublic.com/article/177814/claudine-gay-resignation-plagiarism-israel

There have also been good opeds in the NYT and WashPost on similar themes. It's deeply unfortunate that Gay's resignation will fuel more backlash against free speech and more obnoxiousness by wealthy alumni and donors. But the original sin was Harvard's board elevating someone as president who was not well qualified for the role and for failing to do basic due diligence on her. And what's really unfortunate is that there are more than a few highly qualified women and/or people of color who would have been great candidates - and some may be hesitant to throw their hat into the ring after the sh*tshow of the past few months.

White people have been stealing from Black people for hundreds of years without proper attribution. Suddenly, it's a problem?

Stealing without attribution has always been a problem. Lack of acknowledgement of this in the past doesn’t excuse it in the present.