Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Claire Potter Replies

As expected: Via e-mail, Potter produced no evidence, nor does she retract or apologize. She also makes the bizarre claim that linking to her official webpage is the same thing as posting, on this blog, her e-mail address:

No, I am not going to respond to your hysterical nonsense, or that of your so-called followers (who do send hate mail: read that sentence again, ok?) by spending hours combing through your blog or mine. And by the way, by posting a link to my departmental information you just posted my email address again, just like you did the last time.

It is not clear why it would have required Potter to spend hours combing through blogs to produce evidence for her allegations: wouldn't she have had such evidence before making the allegations?

Potter also has an unusual conception of blogs. It's my sense--and, indeed, the sense of most who blog--that those who read blogs are "readers." Potter, however, seems to consider people who read blogs to be "followers"--unintentionally, perhaps, revealing her closed-mindedness.

Indeed, it appears, being a “tenured radical” means never having to say you’re sorry.

153 comments:

Anonymous said...

I note that Googling "claire potter duke" takes you to her website. Ditto with "tenured radical".

So I guess that, by her reasoning, mentioning her name is the same as publishing her e-mail address.

Michael said...

Perhaps Claire Potter can be called as a witness to the civil suit as she seems to be a perfect example of why Durham shouldn't go after innoncent people.

Perhaps some kind soul in Wesleyan's Computer Science department could explain the difference between a link and an email address to Ms. Potter. Or perhaps she could ask a 12-year-old kid.

BTW, I had a look for courses for our son for the spring semester. My approach was to get the courses that he could take (just the ones that are required for his major and a few general ed courses that I thought he might be interested in). I took the schedule information and then did a lookup on the professors in ratemyprofessors.com and cut and pasted them into a document. I think did a quick web search on the professors and added any information that I could find that might be useful. I then handed him the four pages of information which he read. I think that he can make a more informed decision with the information. And we've found a few professors to definitely avoid.

I'm sure that I'm not the only parent or student that does this sort of thing. One of the biggest problems doing this is for professors that don't have a web record. It's pretty clear that Ms. Potter doesn't have this problem.

no justice, no peace said...

Inre: Ms. Potter's post...the following comments are quite on-point.

"What, exactly, is "almost all of whom are white" supposed to mean? You sound like you have higher expectations and standards for whites than you do for blacks. I think that makes you a racist. I think you and Mr. Imus may have more in common than you think."

"Let's play word subsitution: "That these [female] [basketball] players at a [public] university, almost all of whom are [black], have not been repeatedly identified -- in jest or seriously -- as the semi-criminal youth gang that they appear to be"

See, you ARE a racist and sexist.

O, and classist."

Too rich...they are indeed what they despise and that is the mythology of a world that never existed, or at least not to the extent they conjur in their maladjusted dreams.

Anonymous said...

"tenured radical" = "tenured laziness"

no justice, no peace said...

Out to Lunch: Clair Potter, by Tina Forbes, 11/7/03

"...Potter said rumors and gossip might also be helpful in defining history; without portraying them as truth. "I'm trying to reinvent political history; to put it in a nutshell," she said..."

No kidding.

It's mush like this that demonstrates that the Klan of 88 and their abettors, like Potter are dangerous.

no justice, no peace said...

Wesleyan College tuition approaches $50,000 per year.

That's quite an expensive decision to hear Ms. Potter's opinion about J. Edgar Hoover and feather boas.

Anonymous said...

KC:

Claire Potter appears to be auditioning for the role of Nurse Ratched.

Ken
Dallas

Debrah said...

Here's another version of the strange Potter scribblings.

It's amazing how she seems to have copied some of KC's structural blogging techniques.

What a libelous cretin!

Debrah said...

"And by the way, by posting a link to my departmental information you just posted my email address again, just like you did the last time."

LOL!!!

ROTFLM-T's-O !!!

This puerile Potter pest is a stream of belching erroneous emissions.

It appears that even she has been taken over by the fumes of her own bile.

If anyone reads her reply to KC you will quickly recognize the very same mentality we've witnessed ad nauseum from Duke's Gang of 88.

Painfully banal......but with a twist of comedy.

Debrah said...

It's also hilarious that the lost-inside-the-"something-happened"-insanity Potter pest really believes that anyone from KC's Wonderland has her on the radar screen.

I wouldn't have even had a clue who she is if not for the uncovering of her extremely libelous behavior.

Like the Gritty Duke Gang, her only response is some incoherent garbled mess......attempting to put herself in the "victim" role.

I pity the students of this ratty woman.

Richard Aubrey said...

Jeez. What a foot-shooter.
And she hasn't a clue.
Amazing.

Anonymous said...

KC: I cannot understand why these "professors" continue to fence with you. They are entering into a battle of wits completely unarmed. Perhaps you should consider bestowing a Marie Antoinette award for credibility suicide. The list of potential recipients is extensive, so many worthy candidates. Selecting THE winner could prove to be difficult. Each time I feel that nothing more about this incident can amaze me, I find myself, well, amazed.

TaterCon said...

RAubrey, your observation sorta reminds me of the Tom Petty song title, to wit:
"Rebel Without a Clue"....

Fits a lot of 'em, doesn't it?

Stephen said...

Richard: Not only did she shoot herself in the foot, it was in her mouth at the time.

Anonymous said...

I think Claire was just trying to finish up the requirements for the "attack KC" merit badge. You need one of those to make "G88 eagle scout."

Ralph Phelan said...

Following debrah's 11/27/07 10:16 AM link I see:

The other video footage I used I found on the internet, and as much as I wish I could cite where, I have no recollection of the website. The songs used (in order of appearance) are “Sky Pilot” by The Animals, “Good News Week” by Hedgehoppers Anonymous and “Prayer of the Children” by Kurt Bestor.

Quick, somebody call the RIAA!

Ralph Phelan said...

"So I guess that, by her reasoning, mentioning her name is the same as publishing her e-mail address."

And rightly so. The last thing the "tenured radicals" need is for people outside their circle to notice their existence. Normal people's reaction to them tends to be unfavorable.

Anonymous said...

I can appreciate spending fifty thousand for Duke but Wesleyan U???

Anonymous said...

I wanted to thank Debrah or whomever posted the link to Professor Potter's blog. I found her posts fascinating and rather less petty than some that Professor Johnson has produced.

Moreover, I found the people who commented there generally less nasty than many who post here. I wonder, for example, why Debrah refers to her as "this puerile Potter pest" and "this ratty woman"? I am even more perplexed as to why Professor Johnson thinks a comment like Debrah's should remain up.

An interesting task for Professor Johnson might be to do a post not unlike the one he titled "The Academic 'Street,'" but incorporating this time nasty comments by Debrah and others who attack those they consider to disagree with them/Professor Johnson.

Anonymous said...

Does Potter have a brother?

Anonymous said...

To: 11:33 am Anonymous poster

When, in the face of all logic and evidence to the contrary, someone clings to an indefensible position it only demonstrates how delusionsal they are. Ms. Potter has taken her agenda to label young men rapists when the actual evidence proved they did not even touch Crystal Gail Mangum. How do you square this?

Anonymous said...

ok, who ordered 88 T-shirts from Claire?

Debrah said...

To the oleaginous (11:33 AM)--

You confuse a few things.

In the opinions of many, someone like the Potter woman does not deserve the same level of respect ordinarily given to normal people.

It is a less than normal pursuit when someone attempts to elevate a totally false scenario in order to harm three young men just starting out in life.

And who also deserved the support of their university and the alleged "professors" at Duke.

This is not an issue as benign as a "disagreement".

Potter wallows in the same bizarre muck as Duke's Gang of 88. The university had to settle with the three men and their families for millions......in large part because of the behavior of those professors.

Potter is a superfluous mess.

The Diva is one who never hurts anyone's feelings unintentionally.

mac said...

11:49

I agree with you:
"In the face of all logic and evidence to the contrary..."

However, we might ask ourselves: why should things like "logic" and "evidence" matter to a neo-historian who thinks gossip is vitally important to understanding history?

Gossip is a rancid polluter of history, and makes even current events hard to fathom; gossip confuses and distorts; gossip is mean-spirited and unforgiving.
BTW, G88 could be called "Gossip 88," as they prefer the distorted version of the truth to reality.

Don't bother these little neo-historians with facts, which are little more than a bother, inconvenient and destined to be brushed away and ignored.

You're so right, they are - (as a class) - delusional. And furthermore, neo-historians have lots in common with the Holocaust deniers like the pint-sized puke from Iran, whose view of Israel is based upon nothing more than gossip.

Small wonder that the 88 and their ilk are largely anti-Israel.

inman said...

Debrah @ 11:59 said:

"The Diva is one who never hurts anyone's feelings unintentionally."

Interesting. When I was growing up, that was also how one could define a gentleman or a lady.

An example of that adage can be witnessed in the 1988 debate between Lloyd Bentsen and Dan Quayle. Quayle asserted that he had as much experience as John F. Kennedy when Kennedy ran for office. Bentsen retorted: "Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy."

Oh, and I would assert that Lloyd Bentsen was indeed a gentleman.

Anonymous said...

Debrah,

You can't be the Diva anymore. Karla says SHE wants to be the Diva. In fact, Brodhead will be announcing shortly that she has been 'elevated' to the Edward R. Kenan 'Distinguished' Diva-ship at Duke.

bill anderson said...

Does anyone notice the pattern? The G88 almost to a person held that they were above having to answer anyone for what they did. In fact, to question ANYTHING that they did was to engage in racism/sexism/homophobia/specism/lookism/whateverism.

It seems that Potter fits that crowd to a "T."

Anonymous said...

KC: My Father has a great saying:

"If you argue with an idiot, pretty soon you start sounding like one."

Potter is, indeed, an idiot by what I have seen. I wouldn't waste your time on her at this point.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Debrah said...

TO 12:27 PM--

Uh-huh.

Anonymous said...

the tenured radical did not like my suggestion to send you one of her t-shirts and has removed the comment from her blog. sorry K.C. perhaps the Diva can arrange an exchange of a copy of UPI for the t-shirt at some undisclosed location?

"beware the zealot for (s)he is humorless"

Ralph Phelan said...

"If you argue with an idiot, pretty soon you start sounding like one."

It's better just to mock them.

kcfan said...

The old saw is apt: Never argue with an idiot. She'll bring you down to her level, and beat you with experience.

BTW, I've been a reader of DIW for more than a year, and the only "hysterical nonsense" I've ever here seen has been the rantings of Claire Potter and her ilk. I shudder to think what her "scholarship" looks like.

P.S. to K.C. Did you see that Mark Anthony Neal will be speaking on Thursday at a highly intellectual symposium at Princeton? The event is called Aint That A Groove: The Genius of James Brown. Neal will be addressing the topic: “It’s A Man’s Man’s Man’s World”: Black Power, Black Masculinity
and the Politics of Funk.

Ralph Phelan said...

"has removed the comment from her blog"

She also removed one of mine, in which I responded to her statement:
One: the day after Thanksgiving is the busiest day of the year for Rotorooter. Does this tell you something about how much food Americans, as a group, waste?


with the theory that it was, rather, the effect of Thanksgiving feasters consuming an unusually large amount of dietary fiber.

Definitely humorless.

And unlike DIW, where the mark of a "this comment deleted" remains to show that editing occurred, in Potter's Stalinist world offending comments are silently airbrushed away, as if they never were.

Ralph Phelan said...

"removed the comment from her blog"

I should document my other comment before she notices it and disappears it too:

In a town like Zenith, home to Zenith University, people have had plastic turkeys hanging from the trees in the front yard since they took down the fake cobwebs and ghosties on November 1. These are people who never seem to miss a chance to decorate. You have them in your town too -- they are perennial patrons of the Christmas Tree Shoppes, people who swooped in on December 26th, 2006, to purchase Blinky Santa on sale. These are the people who are really ready to rip down the plastic birds and get a full creche, with Kings sneaking around the side of the house, out on the lawn by Friday noon at the latest.

But you've got to think that many of them are probably decorating to stave off the rage and pain....


Funny, I just think they're having fun.

Project much?

traveler said...

Re: Tenured Radical

Where Credit is Due: Rutgers Basketball, Don Imus and Drive Time Shock

(If you want a good laugh, read the comments to this post. Not many posters agree with her. I am hoping those are students posting about her ridiculous remarks. I would think she would learn something from her own blog!)

Comments:

"And if I were a falsely accused Duke student, I would file a defamation lawsuit against YOU, and your college for allowing an atmosphere that makes your comments possible." Get out your check book.”

http://tenured-radical.blogspot.com/2007/04/where-credit-is-due-rutgers-basketball.html
-------------------------
Re: Claire Potter: “...posting, on this blog, her e-mail address”
(IMO, that is the statement of a rank amateur Internet user. Anyone could have that information in one simple search.)
---------------------------
Re: “...your so-called followers (who do send hate mail: read that sentence again, ok?)”

(If she means the hate mail received by the Gang of 88, their e-mail addresses were listed on dozens of web pages. To assume anyone from D-I-W sent any e-mails, without proof, is.....well, stupid! To put it kindly.)

Anonymous said...

Is it OK to say "Ho, Ho, Ho" this Christmas season?

Anonymous said...

"P.S. to K.C. Did you see that Mark Anthony Neal will be speaking on Thursday at a highly intellectual symposium at Princeton? The event is called Aint That A Groove: The Genius of James Brown. Neal will be addressing the topic: “It’s A Man’s Man’s Man’s World”: Black Power, Black Masculinity
and the Politics of Funk."

Wow. That sounds like it could be a fascinating and illuminating topic -- but only if it was studied by someone who reached their conclusion after examining the evidence. I'm afraid I don't have confidence in Professor Neal to meet that standard, after his bizarre declaration that when nooses are found in college settings, it's actually a ploy by white students to increase their own class ranking by distracting black students.

jim2 said...

Harry is apparently not the only Potter to live in a fantasy world.

Search for Meaning said...

When KC writes a post you can tell that he has researched his position, has a grasp of logic and understands the laws of probability.

Potter either doesn’t have the skill set that KC has or she feels that it doesn’t mater since race and gender trump facts and logic.

I would not expect an apology or a meaningful explanation.

SPQR_US said...

Sorry man...

I like your blog and I sent Claire Potter an email questioning:

Her sanity, general mental stability, weak moral fiber, hysterical tirades, professional qualifications, gender bias and her hatred of due process.

However I did that all on my own. I don't feel like a follower.

I will send her another few emails though in hopes of clearing this whole thing up between the 3 of us.

Thoughts? :-)

LarryD said...

1:56 PM

As long as you're not in Sydney, Australia.

Anonymous said...

For all who post here: please don't sit back content with posting. WRITE your state legislators and demand real oversight and participation in the tenure process.

One valuable contribtion fo this blog is the unmasking of the Duke 88 in a way they have never had to "tolerate" before.

Help restore fairness, balance and real academics to our universites; lets get rid of or at least contain the fungus-like growth of these charlatans. Cut off the unrestricted money. Demand real participation by responsible people in the selection of instructors and the tenure process.

Anonymous said...

With regard to the Gang of 88 and their supporters (Potter, et al.), and any expectations of apologies, perhaps, in analyzing the situation, we have been approaching it all wrong. Let's give them credit where credit is due. It may not be that they are being obstinate or unethical. It may be that they are all simply too goddamned stupid to understand the upshot of the Lacrosse hoax (not that the situation is that difficult to comprehend - but, then again, very few of them appear to have anything even remotely resembling two brain cells to rub together [not that there's anything wrong with that]).

stephen said...

Anon 1:56 -- Sorry, "Ho, Ho, Ho" has been deemed offensive. This year you have to go with "Har, Har, Har". Just put a parrot on Santa's shoulder and a hook on his left hand.

Anonymous said...

I just had a look at Claire Potter's "Tenure Radical" [more like "Tenured Ass"] blog. She isn't very bright, is she?

Anonymous said...

A simple Google inquiry gave me Claire Potter's email address and her blog. This buffoon is a piece of work and symbolizes just how low our educational standards are sunk. And Wesleyan? Isn't that a Methodist school like Duke (used to be)?

Debrah said...

TO 1:33 PM--

Too funny.

The thug intellectual's got it goin' on!

But even the late James Brown would have to agree that the fabulous KC is the man for all seasons.

Anonymous said...

With the likes of Claire Potter (not to mention the members of the Group of 88), what I see are lips flapping; yet, all I hear is "blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...".

Debrah said...

TO 2:04 PM--

Listen, everyone who knows anything about Duke's Gang of 88---(and by now that's the entire country....moreover, because of KC's blog, many places across the globe)---knows that Thug Neal is delusional and kind of nutty.....however.....

.....I will give him credit for showing up here under his own name and commenting. The rest of the Gang just show up anonymously and ankle-bite like creepy neglected children.

Thug Neal made some very slanderous comments and wrote some very libelous things about the lacrosse players; however, unlike some of his radical friends, I think he's actually crazy enough not to understand how crazy he is.

Anonymous said...

Thanks to Prof. Potter, Wesleyean takes a direct hit. Already considered an off-beat place, Wesleyan will now be known for giving life-time employment to someone who can't be bothered with facts, and has no qualms about publically making false claims, the opposite of the characteristics a teacher at any level should have. At some universities, being a professor apparently means having the freedom to say any damn fool thing one wants. Higher education is sometimes neither higher nor education.

Debrah said...

This is one of very few things I could find on Politics and Funk.

Perhaps because this is a relatively new "discipline" (LOL!)......concocted one night when a few "professors" were between an appearance on Soul Train and a fundraiser for the Rev Sharpton.

Neal, once again, is on the cutting edge.

Jim in San Diego said...

Prof Potter appears to fall into the surprisingly large class of tenured college professors who simply are not very bright. They use rant instead of reason because it does not take very much intelligence to rant.

The very, very large question is, what in the world can the rest of us do about this? Apparently, not very much.

Jim Peterson

Anonymous said...

Perhaps someone, here, has already pointed this out: There is an article (from 2003), by Tina Forbes, about Claire Potter (www.dailycampus.com/news/2003/11/07/Focus/Out-To.Lunch.Claire.Potter-551878.shtml). The article is entitled "Out to Lunch: Claire Potter". In the article, Forbes notes: "Potter said rumors and gossip might also be helpful in defining history; without portraying them as truth. 'I'm trying to reinvent political history; to put it in a nutshell,' [Potter] said."

Anonymous said...

A comparison between Potter's original post of 4/10/2006 and the post of that date now at her site shows that she has altered her reference to the women's lacrosse team as "nitwits" (it just says "people" now) and deleted the reference to the men's team as "profoundly disturbed" young men.

Ralph Phelan said...

The very, very large question is, what in the world can the rest of us do about this? Apparently, not very much.

Jim Peterson


You can check the idocy level of your own ala mater, and make appropriate adjustments when their alumni association comes begging.

You can tell your state representatives whether you think your state college system deserves increased funding, and if so for what.

You can tell your Congresscritters that you're not sure it's really in the taxpayer interest to give subsidized loans for general liberal-arts degrees (as opposed to subsidizing vocational training with measurable economic benefits).

When an educational institution comes asking your town for a zoning change, you can bring to the debate the assumption that they're just another interest group, and lobby to squeeze them as hard as you would Walmart.

We can all start to withdraw the general societal deference, goodwill and slack that academia depends on. No need for a great crusading effort - just don't give them a free ride any more.

Anonymous said...

Just a point of inquiry: Does anyone happen to know who holds the William R. Kenan Professorship of Politics and Funk, at Duke?

Anonymous said...

It's even worse than Claire realizes. In order to access this blog, a user must fire up a web browser which has a built-in search capability, which can then be used to locate and access literally millions of email addresses.

And don't let's get started on anywho.com...

Anonymous said...

"Sorry, "Ho, Ho, Ho" has been deemed offensive. This year you have to go with "Har, Har, Har".

Since this is the internet era, we should go with Heh, Heh, Heh.

Mike S

One Spook said...

Years ago when I was trained in analyzing "message traffic," I had no idea that those skills would be transferable to something like the internet.

This Potter person is one in the same as the ankle biter-commenter I have referred to here as a marginalized, frightened little girl ... ummm, the direct opposite of a woman like Debrah (who this ankle biter has several times criticized).

As many of you have stated, she cannot and will never address your comments about her ideas --- she simply is unable to defend her ideas because she realizes they are indefensible. This woman is neither dumb nor ignorant, but she is woefully frightened.

She will attack KC and any of you personally, and she will dwell on extrinsic issues like what KC should be doing with his free time in Israel.

This is a person who, in the autumn of her academic career, tries to put a tasty icing on a poorly baked cake with her cutsie, silly, blog style. She is attempting to cover up her own sad realization that she is presently just as marginalized as she was when she learned the truth at seventeen

Hers is a sad existence, but even sadder is the realization that a marginalized person like her who ignores facts in favor of ideology and refuses to engage in civil, reasonable discourse can actually become a tenured professor.

One Spook

traveler said...

Re: Reverse Discrimination
(Shining the light on these people is starting to change things. You can view the video, and make up your own mind.)

City Worker: Denver Diversity Video Discriminates
Denver Suspends Use Of Video After Public Reports

DENVER A diversity training video has drawn a complaint from a Denver city employee who claims its unfavorable portrayal of whites amounts to "institutional racism." A city official said Tuesday it was suspending use of the video.

The video titled, "Laughing Matters -- Think About It," features a white, blue-collar worker named Billy who's portrayed as racist, sexist, and clueless while illustrating inappropriate humor.

"Diversity, to me, doesn't mean hammer the white guy," said Dennis Supple, a heating, ventilation and air conditioning mechanic who said he's considering filing a lawsuit.

"Diversity means you have respect for everyone, regardless of their race, their gender, their religion, their sexual orientation."

http://cbs4denver.com/watercooler/local_story_331081043.html

redcybra said...

"Out To Lunch"...boy, that describes Claire Potter perfectly. You get better history from Wikipedia than you do from her.

Debrah said...

Here's traveler's link.

Eric said...

Search on Google for the following three words: "Claire", "Potter", and "Wesleyan". Hit #3, currently, is her department home page, complete with her email address. Add "History" to the list of search terms, and her department home page hits #1. Why would she expect that link to be private? It sounds like she needs to either get her department home page taken down, or get Google (and all other search engines) to stop indexing it, if she doesn't want people to find her...

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Just a point of inquiry: Does anyone happen to know who holds the William R. Kenan Professorship of Politics and Funk, at Duke?

11/27/07 4:29 PM
-------------------------------------
According to herself, Karla F. C. Holloway holds the William R. Kenan Professorship of Everything Including the Kitchen Sink at Duke.


Which somehow reminds me of the famous Oxford doggerel:

"First come I, my name is Jowett
There's no knowledge but I know it
I'm the Master of this College
What I don't know isn't knowledge"

Debrah said...

"This is a person who, in the autumn of her academic career, tries to put a tasty icing on a poorly baked cake with her cutsie, silly, blog style. She is attempting to cover up her own sad realization that she is presently just as marginalized as she was when she learned the truth at seventeen."

This is great.

Like something KC would write if he were as mean as you are.

LOL!!!

LOL!!!

(Just kidding.)

Anonymous said...

"According to herself, Karla F. C. Holloway holds the William R. Kenan Professorship of Everything Including the Kitchen Sink at Duke."

William R. Kenan has got to be rolling over in his grave.

Anonymous said...

CHRIS DAVIS, HARVARD '73

As the American economy continues to deteriorate, tenured radical nuts like Frau Doktor Potter will find their services less and less in demand.
Why?
With $2.5 TRILLION of bad mortgages the party's over.........

a Duke Dad said...

Pink Floyd has summarized it all :

We don't need no education
We don't need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teachers leave them kids alone
Hey teacher leave them kids alone
All in all it's just another brick in the wall

Anonymous said...

I, too, left a comment on her blog this morning. It's as gone as a footprint in the sand when high tide arrives. I believe the same analogy can be applied to Claire Potter. Any positives she bestows on the Academy are more than offset by the damage done in the eyes of reasonable people who respect opinion backed by facts and good form. Regrettably for Wesleyan, she apparently cannot produce either good argument backed by fact or anything resembling respectable form. Her NEW president must really be enjoying having her around to bring such a lustre to the campus /s OFF

inman said...

eric @ 5:13 says:

"It sounds like she needs to either get her department home page taken down, or get Google (and all other search engines) to stop indexing it, if she doesn't want people to find her..."

There is an alternative. Lobby congress to pass an "internet diversity e-mail filter" law allowing for radical-whacko-bimbo-nut-cases to automatically delete e-mails from anyone within 2.5 standard devations of normal. Then they will receive only the whack-job e-mails that appeal to them.

Michael said...

I checked Ms. Potter at ratemyprofessor.com and the ratings were almost all very good. There was one negative comment in that she is super-liberal.

She may have a few defects in fact-checking things which she is biased against but her students seem to like her.

LucidInLA said...

Dear Professor Potter:



Thank you for remaining steadfast in your condemnation of the rich white boys at DUKE University who remain “guilty as charged” (rape) only in your narrative of a paternalistic, oppressive society led by “rich white men.” The attorneys investigating this case have found all of these rich white boys to be “innocent of all charges.” The facts in this case just steam-rolled over your meta-narrative, sorry!



I thank you because you serve as a living testament to the fact that the first victim in your ideological war is Truth.



The Truth in this matter is that a black woman, Crystal Mangum, lied about the fact that the “rich white boys” from Duke raped her. The sad reality remains that you continue to believe and proclaim the lie that these boys raped her, which is a gross miscarriage of justice and a dishonor to your profession.



Thank you because you exemplify what is wrong about being a “radical” these days.



Keep up the radically misguided and profoundly disturbed work!



Regards,



Tony Valle

B.A. English, CSUSM 1994

Anonymous said...

3:52 Think you are right about good olde Wesleyan U taking the hit for Prof. Claire. Just as Wheelock U took the hit for Dines. Who goes to these schools? Remember the law Prof from West Texas Law School - did she bring honour to her place of employment??

Anonymous said...

The ethical culture of Potter and her ilk are so out of touch as to chalenge for cause a participation on any jury seeking justice. Her culture would not only have hidden the DNA, as was done, they would have, without fear, attempted to "sandbag" the test by somehow finding "DNA" that "matched" because these people paractice the "big lie" in ways that would make the Nazi bluch. This is what they do. They have no proof, only prejudice. Apologize.

Conserve Liberty said...

Ralph Phelan And unlike DIW, where the mark of a "this comment deleted" remains to show that editing occurred, in Potter's Stalinist world offending comments are silently airbrushed away, as if they never were.

On "commenting" a deleted comment, see LittleGreenFootballs RE: SF Gate - the blog leaves a deleted comment visible in the browser of the poster, but removes it from all other viewers using a tricky bit of computer code - diabolical Stalinist mind game!!

Sneaky Comment Deletion Trick

Anonymous said...

Regarding the symposium at Princeton, (Ain't That a Groove, The Genius of James Brown), doesn't Professor Neal realize that it actually a ploy by whites to increase the class ranking of white students by distracting black students?

SULAX88 said...

RE:
"You Have Received An Automated Reply****************

Because the words "Duke," "KC,""Johnson," "Lacrosse" or "Durham" were
in the body and/or subject line of your email, you have received this
automated reply. Please disregard it if you have contacted our
client on legitimate business.

Be advised that your email address has been recorded and will be kept
as a permanent record should further action be necessary. Harassing
or abusive emails received at this address may be reported to servers
and/or employers, and continued contact may result in prosecution.

We urge you to discontinue contact with our client immediately.

Dunning and Bancroft, LLC"


As best as I can ascertain, the firm of "Dunning and Bancroft, LLC" does not exist. Dunning and Bancroft WERE however, historians from the first part of the 20th century who collaborated on at least one book (and I suspect many other works):

http://www.freewebtown.com/bobwb/schurz/political/schurzp.pdf

This person doesn't even bluff well...but she does, I guess, get some points for creativity in creating a fantasy legal team.

Cato the Elder said...

"No, I am not going to respond to your hysterical nonsense, or that of your so-called followers (who do send hate mail: read that sentence again, ok?) by spending hours combing through your blog or mine."

Um, to what "sentence" does she refer? Shouldn't an American Studies professor have some command of written English?

"who do send hate mail:" is not a sentence. The parentheses in which she asks KC to "read that sentence again, ok?" occurs in the middle of a sentence, making it impossible for her request to refer to any sentence prior to the parentheses unless KC has not posted her full email. Of course, if there is a sentence prior to the afore-quoted bit, her "that" is left quite dangling.
I wonder if her supremely relevant and important scholarly work is as poorly written, and Carthage must be destroyed.

Anonymous said...

I had high hopes that my post would stay at the "tenured" - I have to much respect for Teddy Roosevelt to call Claire, TR. I wrote of KC's education, 2007 Blogger of the year award, his Fulbright,decent selling of the book and jealousy is mean. About eight hours later, she deleted me I have always thought I was funny and a wit - clearly not up to the standard of Clair,

Anonymous said...

She hates getting those emails, so they're "hate mail".

Anonymous said...

3:38, that's offensive to pirates. Especially the "non-white" pirates.

Anonymous said...

stephen said...

Anon 1:56 -- Sorry, "Ho, Ho, Ho" has been deemed offensive. This year you have to go with "Har, Har, Har". Just put a parrot on Santa's shoulder and a hook on his left hand.

11/27/07 3:38 PM


I think "Ho! Ho! Ho!" is now a casting call for a rap video.

Speaking of which, does anyone else recall when Alan Alda got sued for laughing on the old TV gameshow, "Password"? The show involved teams of people where one person would learn a secret word and then gave one-word clues to get the other person to say the secret word. Alda was paired up with a lady of colour. The word was "Deer". Alda looked at the word and then said to his teammate ... "Doe". She immediately said "Knob!" Alda stared at her for a long moment and then began laughing; he laughed harder and harder until he finally fell out of his chair. She sued him for embarrassing her.

RRH

Anonymous said...

Is Potter a Communist?

Anonymous said...

What is it with these people? Two of her areas of expertise are queer studies and gender. Among her research interests - Politics and Culture of the Southern States, and post Stonewall queer political thought. A new interest is campaigns against pornography.

Of course she is currently working on a book "which explores the impact of historical writing about race..."

As a historian she might want to look at the make-work progams of the 1930's, e.g., the Civilian Conservation Camps. At least they cleared trails in federal forests and cleared dead trees. What are these present-day make-work academic frauds contributing?

Anonymous said...

From Sulex88

“We urge you to discontinue contact with our client immediately.

Dunning and Bancroft, LLC"


As best as I can ascertain, the firm of "Dunning and Bancroft, LLC" does not exist. Dunning and Bancroft WERE however, historians from the first part of the 20th century”

_________________________________
If you are correct this person is pretending to be an attorney. I believe most if not all states have criminal penalties for this type of activity.

Hence this is most likely a crime.

I would suggest you and others who have received this email to contact proper authorities and begin the complaint process.

Tom E.

stephen said...

RRH - I was home sick that day and saw that show! I was laughing as hard as Alda! I didn't realize he was sued. Doesn't really surprise me though. Thanks for bringing back a wonderful memory. I will be grinning the rest of the day.

Anonymous said...

"She may have a few defects in fact-checking things which she is biased against but her students seem to like her."

Yeah, the few [apparently misguided] students who actually sign-up for her sappy, underenrolled classes. Wesleyan U. is really getting a bang for its buck with the likes of that one. And we wonder why universities are so damned expensive. Academic welfare queens, like Potter (and Holloway and Neal, to name but a few), are expensive little numbers, indeed.

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous 9:06 said...

...What is it with these people? Two of her areas of expertise are queer studies and gender. Among her research interests - Politics and Culture of the Southern States, and post Stonewall queer political thought. A new interest is campaigns against pornography.
...Of course she is currently working on a book "which explores the impact of historical writing about race..."
...As a historian she might want to look at the make-work programs of the 1930's, e.g., the Civilian Conservation Camps. At least they cleared trails in federal forests and cleared dead trees. What are these present-day make-work academic frauds contributing?
::
They are creating a product and then searching for customers.

Sophomore students who are about 19years old make that mistake during the second week of a Consumer Behavior course but recover by the time the mid-term exam arrives.

Unless of course, they have a serious learning disability and don't learn from the mistakes of others.
::
GP

Debrah said...

I didn't even know--or care--that Potter is a lesbian!

LOL!

Others have said she brings up the issue repeatedly; however, I just gave the front page of her blog a quick glance...and moved on...so I didn't see the posts on her sexual preferences.

If KC hadn't reported on her declasse 88-esque tactics, I would not have known this woman even existed.

A flaming lesbian, no less!

Anonymous said...

Inbreeding of tenured radicals leads to physically and mentally defective professors (i.e. Claire Potter).

Anonymous said...

I think Claire can save herself a lot of time and forget a new book. Checking on Amazon, her 1998 book is around #590,000. No wonder she is jealous of our "Blogger of the Year" - KC. No one would have ever heard of this person outside of olde Wesleyan U except for her rants about Duke lax. She should thank KC for her fifteen seconds.

Amber G. said...

Interesting anagram:
tenured radical = Declared Nutria
For a cute Nutria, see,say
http://www.bio.tu-darmstadt.de/zoology/koch/nutria.jpg

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 10:44 a.m. said:

"Yeah, the few [apparently misguided] students who actually sign-up for her sappy, underenrolled classes. Wesleyan U. is really getting a bang for its buck with the likes of that one. And we wonder why universities are so damned expensive. ACADEMIC WELFARE QUEENS, like Potter (and Holloway and Neal, to name but a few), are expensive little numbers, indeed." (emphasis added).

Sharp stuff. I think "Academic welfare queens" deserves to be hung in the pantheon of hall of fame hoax-related quotes.
_________________

One of the questions frequently asked on this forum is what to do about these professors. In the case of Potter, and a number of others, the answer is clear. Sue her for defamation.

Potter wrote a number of untrue statements in her April 10, 2007 blog, and there is at least one that is clearly defamatory. She wrote: "... the dancers were, it is clear, physically if perhaps not sexually assaulted...."

By using the words "were" and "it is clear," Potter has stated a fact, and she did not couch it in the form of an opinion or a question.

I could locate no disclaimer on Potter's blog indicating that everything therein was only her opinion. On the contrary, she states: "My blogging ethic is neither to name or accurately describe individuals unless I am also describing a public event, book or information already published about that person elsewhere."

Unless Potter can produce a credible publication "clearly" showing, in April 2007 no less, that Mangum and Roberts "were" physically abused, she is liable.

By noting that she is a "Professor of History and American Studies at Wesleyan University in Middletown Connecticut," Potter may have also implicated the University. Why she would not (or the University would not insist that she) note, for example, that the "views expressed herein are those of the author alone" is interesting in light of her publication of defamatory and quasi-defamatory material.

Moreover, at least six comments to Potter's blog provided her notice, back in April, of the defamation. At least three used the word "defamation," and at least two quoted the "physically assaulted" language.

Perhaps a group like FIRE can be formed to litigate defamatory material published by these academic welfare queens when they fail to fact check or are just to lazy to do so. MOO! Gregory

Anonymous said...

KC,
Keep up the good work. It's a small number of people who continue to care about the pursuit of justice in this case but you've been instrumental in keeping the heat on.Thank you.
I am dismayed that Wesleyan has lowered it's standards as much as they have, too bad it can't be highlighted in their alumna giving campaign and high school guidance counselor network.That would have an impact.
It's one thing to disagree but respect the other point of view, and another to continue to lie and slander innocent young men. I still can't believe what I read in your blog, I hope the guys win big in their lawsuits.

Anonymous said...

For MOO! Gregory at 11:51 AM and anonymous at 12:21 PM:

The wonderful thing about suing the universities who hire these academic frauds is that they have no choice but to settle. They can't allow the frauds to be put on the witness stand under oath -- the whole thing would be exposed and the university would be humiliated. I really think that suing universities over the actions of their diversity-hires could be the next gold mine for trial lawyers. Even better than breast implants.

RRH

RRH

One Spook said...

Sulax88 @ 1:34 writes:

"As best as I can ascertain, the firm of "Dunning and Bancroft, LLC" does not exist. Dunning and Bancroft WERE however, historians from the first part of the 20th century who collaborated on at least one book (and I suspect many other works):"

That is a "great get" and would qualify Sulax88 for buying the first round of drinks at the end of a spook work shift.

On the other hand, RRH's 7:59 AM hilarious Alan Alda story of "doe" and "knob" is deemed to be an Urban Legend by the nice folks at Snopes here: Doe and Knob

And so it goes ...

One Spook

Anonymous said...

I don't get the connection between Doe and Knob. What is the joke?

Anonymous said...

12:51PM The whole system has been exposed and Duke humiliated. What is left???

Anonymous said...

One Spook at 1:27,

On Alan Alda, who are you gonna believe -- Jamie Farr or the Dopes of Snopes? :)

Anyway, "Ho! Ho! Ho!" is still a casting call for rap videos. ;)

RRH

Anonymous said...

one spook, was stephen @ 10:29 hallucinating...or does he lie as much as CP?

Anonymous said...

[re: "I don't get the connection between Doe and Knob. What is the joke?"]

'Doe' is to 'door' as 'ho' is to 'whore'.

Ralph Phelan said...

Not only is Ms. Potter a stupid, arrogant, and technologically unsophisticated. Not only does she have a Pravda-ish tendency to lie and to airbrush away evidence that would show she has.

She's also kind of slow.

It took her until about an hour ago to finally notice the comment I described in my 11/27/07 1:47 PM post above and delete it.

Anonymous said...

What people like Potter and the DukeGroup88 fail to understand or refuse to ask themselves about their behavior is why are they doing this? Why are they not supporting the Duke lacrosse players with all their resources. These players are the innocent party in this situation, and as for "something happened," what happened was the intellectual dishonesty and lack of integrity of Potter and people of her ilk in academia. Potter is not an honest or disinterested player in this whole affair that almost led to a dishonest (Is there any other kind?) and wanton lynching. It was the worst sort of racist behavior by people who pruport to be "centered" in their thinking. Well, these people have not been centered, but rather, they have been howling for blood. This has been their constant theme. They are frauds. They follow in the footsteps of those academics who proclaimed the old Soviet Union a heaven on earth or followed Goebbels every whim if the "whim" were "big" enough, and they were always "big" enough for this crowd.

Debrah said...

TO Ralph--

What does this person look like?

Admittedly, I haven't googled her to find out; however, from what I saw earlier, there was just dialogue.

No photos.

Ralph Phelan said...

one spook, was stephen @ 10:29 hallucinating...or does he lie as much as CP?

11/28/07 3:23 PM

Neither.

Go read some of Elizabeth Loftus' work on the malleability of human memory.

It's an issue that's of concern both to folklorists/pop culture historians/urban legend fans and such, and to the legal system in how it deals with eyewitness testimony.

Contrary to many people's intuition, eyewitness testimony is probably the least reliable sort of evidence allowed into courtrooms.

One Spook said...

Anon @ 3:23 PM writes:

"one spook, was stephen @ 10:29 hallucinating...or does he lie as much as CP?"

Why don't you ask stephen ... how on earth would I know what meds he takes when he's home sick?

Show some spine ... if you have a question, ask the person directly.

One Spook

Ralph Phelan said...

debrah 4:24

I have no idea what "she" (who?) looks like.

Are you referring to my "airbrushing" comment? If so:

I was drawing an analogy between the way Potter "disappears" posts she doesn't like and the old Soviet practice of airbrushing out the faces of the "purged" from pre-purge group photos - a practice that inspired the idea of the "un-person" in Orwell's 1984.

Anonymous said...

"What does this person look like?"

It's not a pretty picture, let me assure you.

Anonymous said...

I posted my earlier post about defamation on Claire Potter's "Tenured Radical" blog, leaving out the funny bit about "Academic Welfare Queens"; and despite my sincere attempt to edit the post to a manageable level of offensiveness, it only survived for about 7 hours. Please note that my "truthfulness" is apparently her "offensiveness." Ms. Potter's comment section keeps shrinking!
_________________

It is sad to see culture replaced with pop culture, art surrender to pop art, science usurped by junk science, and now, history overrun by gossip. Thanks, Claire! Your contribution to academia will likely be "Hearstory," which is the combination of history and hearsay. MOO! Gregory

Debrah said...

Take a look at this from November 2003.

Potter's penchant for inventing scenarios to fit into her bizarre world is exhibited here:
*********************************************

Potter said rumors and gossip might also be helpful in defining history; without portraying them as truth.

"I'm trying to reinvent political history; to put it in a nutshell," she said.


Out To Lunch: Claire Potter

mac said...

Debrah 8:38 pm,

Thanks for the link.

Let's say that Claire Potter has a rumor about her. Not that she's really interesting enough to devote a single paragraph of history, but let's suppose that someone suggests that she's really a "radical right-wing male Christian Republican" in drag, and this rumor follows her throughout her career in academia.

It ain't history. And rumors of that sort would give us no clue as to the immature, hateful, libelous, jock-hating person that she actually appears to be. So how would such rumors be helpful to history?

They wouldn't.

mb said...

Wow - an academic who considers gossip to be a credible source for valid research and analyses? This not only tarnishes the reputation of Wesleyan, it smears turds all over her alma mater, NYU.

"Academic Welfare Queens" - ROTFLMAO! Perfect Gregory, perfect! Your opinion on that score is MOA!

Can I be a member of the Sunshine Band now KC? ;)

Anonymous said...

mb, what are you kidding? Certainly gossip is "a credible source for valid research and analyses." It's one of many elements in studying what people believe and why? Data and facts aren't all there is to consider. Before all of you out there in the Sunshine Band start warming up to criticze and attack: think about the role of myth, collective memory, even lies, in history. Think about the importance of rumors and the effect rumors have had on historic events. What people believe is very, very important. They sometimes believe rumors and react to them. They sometimes "make history" as a result.

No, Professor Potter's not tarnishing anyone's reputation. She's doing something quite reasonable.

So, moo to you, as Gregory would say.

BTW, is mb a communist?

Anonymous said...

mb, an anonymous poster up-thread came up with the "Academic Welfare Queen" concept. I'm just a fan. MOO! Gregory

Anonymous said...

To the 6:25 and the 8:11--

Rumors? How about witchcraft? Think a certain trial in Salem, Mass.

Rumors? How about street in the French Revolution?

Rumors? How about Marie Antoinette and incest?

Rumors? What military intelligence sometimes calls it "misinformation"?

The examples of rumors ***and their importance*** in history are virtually endless. And that's leaving out political careers hurt by them! Try thinking about it before attacking.

Anonymous said...

There is a difference between suspecting a thing, and proving it.

Claire Potter is now proven to be without integrity, and a coward and bully of the worst order.

Yesterday, November 28, at approximately 3:20 PM, I left the following comment on Potter's "turkeys" post. I reproduce it here in its entirety.

POST BEGINS

If Professor Potter wishes it to seem that it is she who has academic credibility, and Professor Johnson who is a "turkey", she would be well-advised to start by publicly retracting and hopefully apologizing for the false statements she has made about the falsely accused Duke lacrosse players. To note just the most egregious example, Professor Potter has never retracted her statement that "the dancers were, it is clear, physically if perhaps not sexually assaulted", despite the investigation performed by the office of the Attorney General of North Carolina determining that there was "no credible evidence that an attack occurred in that house that night".

Now, it is not as if it was so clearly false at that time to think that such a thing had happened, because the mainstream media had published many lurid claims regarding the supposed injuries of the accuser. However, by this time the true contents of the medical records are well-known and they do not, of course, support the allegations of physical assault. Professor Potter, I would think that an academic of integrity would, if they learned that a conclusion they had previously pronounced and described as "clear" was based on evidence now known to be false, would make a public retraction of that declaration. It is therefore quite troubling to see you make instead what looks like a determined refusal to make such a correction. It is especially troubling because your reason for not making such a correction seems to be, in essence, "because KC Johnson said I should and KC Johnson is a jerk." Well, it is your right to hold that opinion. It is your right to think that, if KC Johnson is a jerk, you don't owe him anything. However, that is a distraction from the real question. You owe a correction to all those who thought you were an academic of integrity. And to those who were falsely maligned by your claims.

I don't think there's anything further I can say that will sum up the position you are in better than the words of F. Lane Williamson, chairman of the disciplinary panel that disbarred Michael Nifong for his ethical violations, including making false statements about the evidence:

"This is also a case where due to the initial strong statements, unequivocal statements, made by Mr. Nifong, there was a deception perpetrated upon the public. And many people were made to look foolish because they simply accepted that if this prosecutor said it was true, it must be true.

... those who made a rush to judgment based upon an unquestioning faith in what a prosecutor had told them were made to look foolish and many still do look foolish."

POST ENDS

I challenge anyone to read Potter's accusations against KC and find anything in my post which could be judged "out of line" by the standard of civility that Potter herself chose. In short, there was no legitimate reason for Potter to delete the post without trace.

By 6:00 that night it was gone.

KC Johnson said...

To the 10.27:

"think about the role of myth, collective memory, even lies, in history. Think about the importance of rumors and the effect rumors have had on historic events. What people believe is very, very important. They sometimes believe rumors and react to them. They sometimes "make history" as a result."

Indeed they do. And American political historians have been noting such trends for generations. If that sums up Prof. Potter's research on "gossip," it would seem her product would be considered thin for an undergraduate paper, much less a book by a "tenured radical."

Anonymous said...

KC at 11:17, This post is beneath you. I wrote the 10:27 post. I've never read anything Claire Potter has written. I wasn't commenting on her research and I made no claim to be doing so. I was responding to mb's attack on the study of rumors. I feel as if you are using my post to attack the work of Professor Potter. I hope I am mistaken.

Anonymous said...

I am very pleased to see that Professor KC Johnson has noted the validity of the study of rumors. Perhaps some of you early morning posters should have had a cuppa or two before posting to criticize Professor Potter for studying such a thing!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

To the good professor, I cut and pasted you 11:27 response to the 10:17 and it surely does look as if you're trying to imply that 10:17 didn't write/assert. Is this an example of a rumor?

Ralph Phelan said...

What people believe is very, very important. They sometimes believe rumors and react to them. They sometimes "make history" as a result.

No, Professor Potter's not tarnishing anyone's reputation. She's doing something quite reasonable.

That was my initial response too, that Ms. Potter was being unfairly attacked for doing something perfectly reasonable. Given the ambiguousness of the wording, that's a reasonable guess. So I followed the link and checked to be sure.

Much to my surprise and disgust, Potter was not studying the history of rumors to see what they said about those who believed them.

She was treating a claim from a source she admitted had served time for perjury as contributing data for her armchair psychoanalysis of J. Edgar Hoover, and using the fact that the rumor was widely believed at the time as justification for doing so.

mb said...

To 10:27 and 10:46: I see your point and concede it. In my own defense, I'm but a lowly academic in medicine and bioengineering, therefore the notion of relying on rumor and gossip to support one's theories and test hypotheses is quite, ahem, 'novel' and foreign to the likes of this Neanderthal. I'm sorry for jumping to conclusions vis-a-vis what passes for 'scholarship' among many in the humanities. Although I guess I should have known better...

So there, admitting I likely was wrong and apologizing wasn't so hard. The likes of Potter and the Klan of 88 might try it sometime.

That said, KC does make an excellent point that the topic has been examined quite thoroughly for some time now, so it puts it in the category of "been there, done that" and as such removes it from the realm of innovative and worthy of scholarly recognition. It's hardly the stuff of what we might expect from legitimate scholars at first-rate colleges and universities and IMNSHO more apt for high school term papers.

Gregory: I did see after I posted that "Academic Welfare Queens" was a term coined by an anonymous poster farther up, so apologies to the anonymous poster. Still, I simply love the term and plan to use it any and every chance I get when referring to poseurs like Ms. Potter and members of the K88.

As for the Sunshine Band, I wanna play tambourine.

mac said...

After much rumoring and gossip:
Now it seems that "Deep Throat" of the Watergate saga was a spurned #2, hoping for a #1 spot. Nixon didn't choose him -(even though he was lauded for his "loyalty") - proving just how loyal he really was. Not. And so a bungled burglary by 3rd rate detective-wannabees brought down a Presidency. (Newly released material from classified archives have brought this to light.)

10:46
Yes, and there were rumors and gossip around the "Mad Monk" Rasputin, too. Studying these elements of history could be important, if the researcher was capable of discerning truth from fiction.

The trouble is, when people like Potter fail to correct their own innuendo, gossip and whatnot, they perpetuate a corrupted historical record: Potter hasn't even corrected her own corrupted, gossipy, slanderous version of what happened (or rather, didn't happen) at the lacrosse house on the night in question. That's an example of why she's unqualified to study gossip as it relates to historical events.

If she can't be counted on to set something like that right, how can she discern true history from alleged history?

That, in my book, puts her square in the company of "The Gossip Girls on "Hee Haw."

"Now, we're not ones to go 'round spreadin' rumors,
Why, really we're just not the gossipy kind,
No, you'll never hear one of us repeating gossip,
So you'd better be sure and listen close the first time!"

KC Johnson said...

To the 11.29:

It is not my understanding that Potter is claiming to be studying a "history of rumors"--although, in all fairness, she's not exactly clear about her purported topic.

Anonymous said...

To the KC at 12:17, in all fairness, KC, she doesn't have to be clear. Exactly or otherwise. You're not the research Gestapo.

Anonymous said...

Well yeah - Not to many happy employees conspire to bring down an organization. Thanks "deep throat" for helping out.

Anonymous said...

mb at noon, You seem to have a problem reading. KC Johnson did not say that "rumor" is "been there and done that." Rumor has been a topic of analysis. Certainly it will continue to be. Your "been there and done that" doesn't really work here. Best not comment about things you don't know. I thought you were an academic? I don't want you doing my medical work.

Anonymous said...

11:25 Apparently, not too many people have read Claire's writing either. Her 1998 book languishes at # 560,000 at Amazon.

Anonymous said...

12:48, Could you put this information in context? The book is almost a decade old. More important than where it *languishes" on Amazon is how many copies it has sold...What was your point?

KC Johnson said...

To the 12.39:

Indeed she does not. But, I suspect, most academics prefer to have their writing understood, and strive for clarity in their prose.

It's illuminating that Prof. Potter's supporters now appear to be defending her work on the grounds of (a) they haven't read it; or (b) she doesn't have to be clear.

Debrah said...

"To the KC at 12:17, in all fairness, KC, she doesn't have to be clear. Exactly or otherwise. You're not the research Gestapo."


How silly.

Who are you?

Potter's Mammie?

mb said...

anonymous 12:44: KC said "And American political historians have been noting such trends for generations. If that sums up Prof. Potter's research on "gossip," it would seem her product would be considered thin for an undergraduate paper, much less a book by a "tenured radical."" That to me means "been there done that." Of course, YMMV.

As for me "doing [your] medical work" trust me, even if I should want to, I won't. You see, if you had carefully read my post you would have understood that I'm an academic in medicine (and bioengineering), not a practitioner, i.e., physician. Therefore, unlike many of the K88, Potter, et al., I don't practice without the requisite credentials: In my case this means medicine, in their case, respectable scholarship.

Anonymous said...

1:02 KC, I don't think her defenders are doing either. I think you are providing perfect examples of rumor and inuendo. But, I wouldn't expect more from you. No one was defending her: someone was defending "rumor" as a topic of research.

Based on your comments today, I'd never recommend anything you wrote, because I couldn't be sure how accurate it was.

I think you should be ashamed. But, I'm sure you're not.

One Spook said...

KC @ 1:02 PM writes:

"It's illuminating that Prof. Potter's supporters now appear to be defending her work on the grounds of (a) they haven't read it; or (b) she doesn't have to be clear."

[insert Rimshot sound here]

That was a four foot "coffee spitter" comment .. max is five feet.

One Spook

mac said...

12:44
So you think a spurned employee - (in this case, 2nd in command at the FBI) - should skulk about in the backrooms and alleys and attack? Please note: 2nd in command.

Not some middle level manager.
If the atmosphere made him unhappy, it was his own fault maybe? 2nd in command?

That's like Brodhead being unhappy with the leadership at Duke.

mb said...

anonymous 1:43PM,

You're still not 'getting it.'

I think that KC et al. are - and I know that I am - acknowledging that rumor is a valid topic for research. However, it seems clear to me that we're simply stating that rumor has been researched for a very long time, thus to this non-historian it sounds like the equivalent of beating a dead horse. In my field it would likely be akin to researching the usefulness of using soap when washing one's hands. The "duh" factor is quite high.

If Potter wants to do the academic equivalent of playing "Freebird" for the umteenth millionth time, then hey, I say go for it. Just don't expect the rest of us to do anything other than yawn, or point and laugh if we've just had a cuppa Joe and can stay awake through the guitar solo.

mac said...

1:43
KC reprinted her words.
I guess that's what some people call "rumor" and "innuendo."
Especially if you're a Gossip Girl from Hee Haw.

Funny thing: KC allowed your fetid little comment, while dear Claire slices and dices anything that she doesn't like, clean as a Ginsu knife. It is becoming an auto-blog, soon to feature her only her own opinions.

But then, It's Her Party (She Can Cry if She Wants To.)

I doubt you've read UPI. I somehow doubt that you could.

Anonymous said...

look how much fun it is to have a free exchange of ideas here on this internet thinggy!

tell Claire how much fun you had here talking to us and remind her that we could do this on her lonely blog too, if she didn't kep deleting all the comments!

Mr X

Anonymous said...

I hate to beat the drum again, but I'm noticing a pattern here. Culture becomes pop culture (rumors about celebrities), science is attacked by junk science (anything not grounded in the scientific method, such as speculation), and academia now turns to gossip. For example:

1. The Gang of 88 drafted and published their "Listening ad" based upon what amounted to double-hearsay (Magnum told to columnist told to readers). And the Gang didn't even allow the gossip time to percolate into a good urban legend or solid fence-line speculation; rather, they published the "Listening ad" about a week after the rape hoax became public knowledge in the hope of supporting their arguments for change at Duke.

2. You also have the Louisville law professor writing an article published in the Southern Illinois Law Journal about the Duke case employing "holistic" techniques instead of using, for example, sound scientific or statistical methods to support her arguments.

3. On top of that, you have Professor Claire Potter, who publishes an on-line post rife with misinformation about the Duke case, and who provides no citations or apparent desire to source any of her allegations. Subsequently, we learn that Potter uses "rumors" in her academic work to, get this, support her arguments.

I'm beginning to see a trend here .... MOO! Gregory
___________

NOTE: Professor K.C. Johnson did a post about the Louisville Professor some time back. It was fascinating as it spotlighted the Worst. Law. Article. Ever. CODA

Anonymous said...

No, mb at 3:14, **YOU** don't get it. What your master, KC Johnson, didn't make clear, is that the ways of studying rumor have changed over time. It's not old hat. You don't need to understand this, because as you said, you're not in the humanities, but you're wrong. So, go on and believe KC Johnson. Base your comments on that. You'll continue to be laughable.

KC Johnson said...

To the 6.31:

I cleared the last comment on the belief that you are new to the blog, but consider this comment a caution: it is not my practice to clear anonymous comments that contain personal attacks on other commenters. If you want to engage in such behavior, you will at the least need to identify yourself.

In the past, as well, the blog has occasionally had problems with "angry" commenters, a category in which you appear to fall. I'd urge you, in the future, to delay submitting any comments for 15 minutes or so after writing them, just to give yourself a chance to cool down. It's my sense that doing so would allow you to reconsider the merits of submitting comments such as the above.

Thank you for sharing the insight that "ways of studying rumor" (just as the ways of studying anything else) have changed over time. I fear that there's nothing in any of my comments that would have suggested otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Dear Prof. Johnson (6:53),

I saw your advice to the person at 6:31 in response to 3:14. It seems to me that 3:14 is way angrier than 6:31, but didn't get taken to the proverbial woodshed. Could it be because the 3:14 is one of your fans?

mb said...

anonymous 6:31 AM: I've already conceded the point that rumor appears to be a valid topic for study in the humanities. What more do you want?

What you don't seem to 'get' is that for many of us it appears to be a topic that is very mature and thus not innovative, therefore, not worthy vis-a-vis groundbreaking scholarship of the type expected from first-tier academics. If Claire Potter wants to diddle in threadbare pursuits in the autumn of her career, then I say hey, knock yourself out. Just don't expect me to take her seriously, but in IMNSHO she's not a serious academic. Especially given the examples of her 'scholarship' that I've seen, which to these unsophisticated eyes appear to be on par with a mediocre effort by an average high school student.

Of course, as always: These are MOO and YMMV.

Anonymous said...

Few would deny the validity of studying rumors, rumor mongering, and rumor mongerers, in the context of historiography (and whether Potter does that well is an entirely different matter). The problem with Potter is that she is what she studies.

mb said...

Anonymous 10:56 AM: There's much about this case that has made me angry, but re. the topic at hand, i.e., Claire Potter's 'scholarship' and academic credentials,
I'm not angry, I'm dismissive. There's a difference.

I can't speak for Dr. Johnson, but IMNSHO he was cautioning the writer of 6:31 AM against personal attacks, not being angry per se. To me, the reference to anger applied in the sense that personal attacks often are the result of anger, and once one goes through a cooling-off period it's more likely that the person will re-think the ad hominem and instead address the topic of the thread.

I'm glad to discuss topics, and as has been the case in this thread, be persuaded to see a POV that I had not considered (i.e., that rumor might be a valid topic for study in the field of history), and sometimes I'm even angry, but I try not to argue using ad hominems. However, if I ever do so I welcome KC to warn me and delete the comment if he so choses. And actually, IMNSHO deleting ad hominems does the poster a favor by erasing what is rightly viewed as weak and inappropriate debating style.

Anonymous said...

Dear 11:57,

I saw your recent post and I don't understand what you mean by a topic (the study of rumors) being extremely mature. I scrolled up and noticed that initially you dismissed the study of rumors altogether. Isn't it a bit short-sighted of you to dismiss altogether an approach to a field of enquiry that is admittedly outside of your field?

I understand from your posts that you weren't angry. When I read them, you seem rather arrogant vis-a-vis the issue in question,which is odd, because you don't know about it. I don't think of this as a strong and appropriate debating style. I think of it as showing ignorance.

PS What does IMNSHO mean?

mb said...

1:57 PM:
Mature = well-developed

IMNSHO = "in my not-so-humble opinion."

As for dismissing an approach outside of my field, perhaps it's short-sighted, however, I've tried to make it as clear as I can that these are my opinions only ("MOO") and therefore one can take them for what they're worth.

I may appear arrogant to you, but I am quite confident that I understand the scientific method quite thoroughly. If confidence equates with arrogance in your world, then so be it. However, at least I am mature (in the emotional sense) and open-minded enough to discuss the issues with people who don't share my viewpoints and be persuaded by persuasive arguments when they are made. Can we say the same for the likes of Potter, et al.? Apparently not.

R.R. Hamilton said...

KC said...

To 6.31:

cleared last on belief you new the, but this a: it not practice clear comments contain attacks other. If want engage such, you at least to yourself.


Ok, KC didn't really say that. I was just doing an experiment based on my experience that some people's brains seem to register only every-other word that they read. I took KC's post and deleted every other word. And I think I found validation for my theory:

Anonymous said...

Dear Prof. Johnson (6:53),

I saw your advice to the person at 6:31 in response to 3:14. It seems to me that 3:14 is way angrier than 6:31, but didn't get taken to the proverbial woodshed. Could it be because the 3:14 is one of your fans?

11/30/07 10:56 AM


How else can the 10:56 AM comment be explained but that the author's brain absorbs only every other word? For further proof, look at the comments that he references and keep in mind that he considers "3:14" to be "way angrier" than "6:51":

First, mb's comment at 3:14:

mb said...

anonymous 1:43PM,

You're still not 'getting it.'

I think that KC et al. are - and I know that I am - acknowledging that rumor is a valid topic for research. [can you feel the anger?] However, it seems clear to me that we're simply stating that rumor has been researched for a very long time, thus to this non-historian it sounds like the equivalent of beating a dead horse. [the rage!] In my field it would likely be akin to researching the usefulness of using soap when washing one's hands. [I think he's close to violence!] The "duh" factor is quite high.

If Potter wants to do the academic equivalent of playing "Freebird" for the umteenth millionth time, then hey, I say go for it. [A poster child for anger management counseling!] Just don't expect the rest of us to do anything other than yawn, or point and laugh if we've just had a cuppa Joe and can stay awake through the guitar solo. [If he hasn't killed already, he will soon!]


Meanwhile, the "way less angrier" comment at 6:31:

Anonymous said...

No, mb at 3:14, **YOU** don't get it. [nice of her to capitalize "YOU" to lessen mb's eye-strain] What your master, KC Johnson, didn't make clear, is that the ways of studying rumor have changed over time. [here she shows sensitivity to mb's slave status] It's not old hat. You don't need to understand this, because as you said, you're not in the humanities, but you're wrong. [she spares him the embarrassment of being proved wrong -- which she could do, if he were smart and "in the humanities", which he admits he's not!] So, go on and believe KC Johnson. Base your comments on that. You'll continue to be laughable. [she's laughing WITH him, not AT him!]


KC, I ask again, are academic professional as idiotic as they appear on this blog? Are you holding back some really erudite comments from them?

Ralph Phelan said...

re. the topic at hand, i.e., Claire Potter's 'scholarship' and academic credentials,
I'm not angry, I'm dismissive.

What the combination of it and her position reveals about the state of American academia is, on the other hand, grounds for anger and disgust.

Ralph Phelan said...

Am I the only one who thought 6:31 was a parody? It made me laugh!

Are the rest of you all humor-impaired, or has it really become impossible to tell?

mb said...

rrh: ROTFLMAO - Bravo!

That said, if I have to listen to "Freebird" one more time I just might be driven to... ;)

A Duke Dad said...

The reference directory of lawyers is Martindale-Hubbell, available on line at www.martindale.com. It is used by attorneys to locate specialists in a particular area of law, or in a geographic area.

Dunning and Bancroft, LLC is not listed in this source, making it a virtual certainty that it is fictitious.

Perhaps Ms. Potter might consult with the firm of Dewey, Cheatem & Howe.

Anonymous said...

I hesitate to write, do to the fact that I would like to forget I have ever stumbled upon this hateful, hateful site. Also due to the fact I know that this comment may never be allowed to remain on the site. However, I still must say that Claire Potter is an incredible professor, advocate and friend. Please stop the blind judgements - they do nothing to change the truth of her integrity and talent.