Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this girl were short on money, she should have saved on attorney fees. I am sure her attorney(s) weren't working for free out of kindness of their hearts.

Hope she has to pay for Purdue and Kim's costs. She managed to lose on summary judgment when that's extremely rare. She had no case. That alone should have told her to fold and cut loses.

Are you the President of Ishii's fan club? What sorry company you keep.

Didn't keep up with Isshi. Did he say anything specific about the plaintiff's race or gender - or was it more of a generic statement against DEI? Elon Musk said derogatory things about a group of people. Airlines who hire people based on diversity will see their planes falling out of the sky. Hence, Must wrote DEI is more accurately described as DIE.

Yes the jury decided Ishii did discriminate, but the university didn't.

Ishii is a negative person. This doesn't give plaintiff a lifetime job when she is unqualified. So, she lost.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this girl were short on money, she should have saved on attorney fees. I am sure her attorney(s) weren't working for free out of kindness of their hearts.

Hope she has to pay for Purdue and Kim's costs. She managed to lose on summary judgment when that's extremely rare. She had no case. That alone should have told her to fold and cut loses.

Are you the President of Ishii's fan club? What sorry company you keep.

Didn't keep up with Isshi. Did he say anything specific about the plaintiff's race or gender - or was it more of a generic statement against DEI? Elon Musk said derogatory things about a group of people. Airlines who hire people based on diversity will see their planes falling out of the sky. Hence, Must wrote DEI is more accurately described as DIE.

Yes the jury decided Ishii did discriminate, but the university didn't.

Anonymous wrote:So universities are allowed to keep a raving racist/misogynist on faculty to sandbag undesirable candidates consequence free. Incredible what universities get away with.

This is what PP should be opposing:

Elon Musk Cosigns Racist Claim That Black Students Have Low IQs
https://futurism.com/elon-musk-black-students-low-iqs

PP should be opposing Musk and demanding diversity pilots at all airlines. I'd refuse to fly unless the plane is DEI certified.

Anonymous wrote:If this girl were short on money, she should have saved on attorney fees. I am sure her attorney(s) weren't working for free out of kindness of their hearts.

Hope she has to pay for Purdue and Kim's costs. She managed to lose on summary judgment when that's extremely rare. She had no case. That alone should have told her to fold and cut loses.

Are you the President of Ishii's fan club? What sorry company you keep.

So universities are allowed to keep a raving racist/misogynist on faculty to sandbag undesirable candidates consequence free. Incredible what universities get away with.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this girl were short on money, she should have saved on attorney fees. I am sure her attorney(s) weren't working for free out of kindness of their hearts.

Hope she has to pay for Purdue and Kim's costs. She managed to lose on summary judgment when that's extremely rare. She had no case. That alone should have told her to fold and cut loses.

If she had lost on summary judgment, there wouldn’t have been a trial. Also, summary judgment isn’t uncommon in Title VII cases.

Why would you post something like that?

She lost. Losers should pay all costs.

A comment not responsive to the summary judgment issue, but also wrong.

If you bring a non frivolous civil rights suit, you shouldn’t have to pay costs just for the privilege of having a court review the matter. If that’s how it worked, only the wealthy could afford civil rights.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this girl were short on money, she should have saved on attorney fees. I am sure her attorney(s) weren't working for free out of kindness of their hearts.

Hope she has to pay for Purdue and Kim's costs. She managed to lose on summary judgment when that's extremely rare. She had no case. That alone should have told her to fold and cut loses.

If she had lost on summary judgment, there wouldn’t have been a trial. Also, summary judgment isn’t uncommon in Title VII cases.

Why would you post something like that?

She lost. Losers should pay all costs.

Anonymous wrote:If this girl were short on money, she should have saved on attorney fees. I am sure her attorney(s) weren't working for free out of kindness of their hearts.

Hope she has to pay for Purdue and Kim's costs. She managed to lose on summary judgment when that's extremely rare. She had no case. That alone should have told her to fold and cut loses.

If she had lost on summary judgment, there wouldn’t have been a trial. Also, summary judgment isn’t uncommon in Title VII cases.

Why would you post something like that?

If this girl were short on money, she should have saved on attorney fees. I am sure her attorney(s) weren't working for free out of kindness of their hearts.

Hope she has to pay for Purdue and Kim's costs. She managed to lose on summary judgment when that's extremely rare. She had no case. That alone should have told her to fold and cut loses.

Great news:

HAMMOND, Indiana - Although a jury decided that longtime professor Mamoru Ishii harbored discriminatory animus that led to discrimination against former nuclear engineering professor Tatyana Sizyuk while she sought tenure, the jury found that Purdue University was not involved in the discrimination.

But because she had to prove that both parties were involved in any discrimination, she lost her case."

Jury: Ishii was biased in denying prof’s tenure, Purdue was not | Campus | purdueexponent.org
https://www.purdueexponent.org/campus/article_2c2ee61e-bd20-11ee-ba6b-e7deeb847999.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the plaintiff deserved to be tenured at #5 engineering dept in the country, what has she accomplished since leaving Purdue? Was she offered a tenured position at MIT or Caltech? Was she struggling to land a lecture post at lesser universities?

You agree that she deserved to have her tenure evaluated by a committee not motivated by race or gender, yes?

(And, to your question, I think she at least took a $750,000 Dept. of Energy grant project with her to Argonne National Laboratory following the committee's vote to deny tenure.)

So, no loss for Argonne. Her salary's not coming out of Argonne. She deserved to have her tenure evaluated by a committee not motivated by race or gender. That's what Purdue's defense narrative is - independence from irrelevant factors.

Anonymous wrote:If the plaintiff deserved to be tenured at #5 engineering dept in the country, what has she accomplished since leaving Purdue? Was she offered a tenured position at MIT or Caltech? Was she struggling to land a lecture post at lesser universities?

You agree that she deserved to have her tenure evaluated by a committee not motivated by race or gender, yes?

(And, to your question, I think she at least took a $750,000 Dept. of Energy grant project with her to Argonne National Laboratory following the committee's vote to deny tenure.)

If the plaintiff deserved to be tenured at #5 engineering dept in the country, what has she accomplished since leaving Purdue? Was she offered a tenured position at MIT or Caltech? Was she struggling to land a lecture post at lesser universities?