Comments and analysis about the Duke/Nifong case (2006-2014).
(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.
(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.
(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.
9 comments:
LIS!
I'm so glad KC highlighted this.
Starn and the Mrs.---when they aren't protesting and then evading law enforcement---are trolling and lurking inside Wonderland to read everything KC posts.
LOL!!!
Watch little Orin.
He will feverishly try to whip up something he thinks is palatable and send to the N&O....in hopes of salvaging some credibility and relevancy with them.
I love it!
What a joke that little cretin is!
If Starn indeed manipulated language as portrayed in this narrative, then he deserves rebuke and whatever academic punishment is appropriate for someone who knowingly subverts reality.
If this is a single instance, then mercy is perhaps the better answer.
If this, however, represents an instance that is part of a pattern...then I'd say, Starn deserves to be teed up and smacked with a metaphorical 9 iron and launched, not to the green, but to the sand trap or to the woods or, better yet, to the water hazard.
What perfect intellectual dishonesty!
I have been very impressed with JinC's work. Dogged determination in search of truth and justice.
As this misquote was severe enough to make Krzyzewski look like an idiot, I wonder if it gives him a plasuible defamation claim.
Well, Starn certainly is an Orthodox 88er.
And some would say: "There is no ox so dumb as the orthodox!"
Particularly the orthodoxy of the 88: Race, Gender, Class. Their version of a holy trinity.
If one takes Prof. Starn at his word - that he believes he did not misrepresent, intentionally or otherwise - what Coach K said, what then is the explanation for Prof. Starn's rendition and interpretation of the coach's statement? Perhaps Prof. Starn's understanding of what the coach said is a reflection of how Prof. Starn analyzes and reports on data. I know nothing about Cultural Anthropology, but perhaps there are different schools of thought in that academic discipline, and perhaps one school of thought holds that it is appropriate for a cultural anthropologist to bring to or to impose on data the anthropologist's cultural point of view rather than to try to discover the meaning from cultural data. Maybe, just as some judges are known as judicial activists, there are cultural anthropology activists and Prof. Starn is one of them.
Coack K should end his silence and respond to Starn's use of his quote.
John has a reply from Starn, such as it is. I think Starn should pen a “Clarifying Statement” of his misrepresentation of coach K.’s statement. That would follow Duke’s faculty handbook it would seem. Starn’s good friend Anne Allison signed the first Listening Statement remember, and we know distorted comments mean little to the Gang of 88. I would guess she doesn’t have the courage to answer John. Such arrogance from people so wrong is terrifying. They are not connected enough to real life to be sorry for their deplorable actions.
Coach K has navigated himself and others through much murkier waters than the Starn mis-quote.
If the good Coach went around trying to correct all the people who mis-quote him and who envy him, he wouldn't have time to Coach at Duke or at Team America.
I, for one, salute his wisdom and discretion. What he said stands as he said it. If somebody else misquoted or misused it for their own purposes that is THEIR problem.
Truth will out. The mis-statement didn't make Coach K look bad. It made the mis-quoter look bad. Leave it alone. It just serves to shine more light in the dark corners. People who WANT to see truth, will. People who do not want to, will cover their eyes and ears to avoide seeing and hearing.
Post a Comment