Tom, I submitted a note last night to one of the Pit Mods in which I indicated that I would voluntarily give up correcting PRR’s grammar. (And I will include syntax too.) The point about the level of his language skills has been made.
I was an English teacher for twenty years. My lowly Bachelor of Arts Degree was with a Major in English and a Major in Speech and Drama from Peabody College (of Vanderbilt University.) I graduated with honors. That was also decades ago.
As with any other profession, there are certain standards which are expected. We work hard for the privilege of being called “teacher.” A basic understanding of the structure of the language is required. (We still make mistakes, certainly, but they are by accident, and not inherent in our styles.)
Just as lawyers or doctors would call to the attention of other Dopers what they considered to be a false claim to expertise in the fields of law and medicine, I have done the same in education. Teachers also have to be licensed.
Post 357 reveals PRR’s basic dishonesty about his credentials. His posts since then – including his inability to remember what his doctorate is in – only underscore that. I don’t have need or desire to push that issue further.
It is my personal opinion that while PRR may have been a nice guy outside of the Dope, he has given in to the temptation to be unkind, unfair and dishonest here.
I have not lied nor have I been presented with anything that I said that was knowingly inaccurate. (I have yet to check about what was said about Southern judges.)
Was there anything else that you can think of specifically, PRR?
Zoe, to the extent that pseudotriton ruber ruber chooses to engage you regarding the accuracy of his credentials, have at it.
I just note that it is a bit unseemly to show up in large numbers of threads in which he posts simply to attack his grammar. I doubt that your posts have affected anyone’s opinions of him, but they may cause you to get written off as a shrill harpy (not to mention a stalker).
God knows what PRR’s diploma says because god knows what the university administrators had decided the euphemism-of-the-week for “knows stuff about English literature” was.
As as for having a Ph.D. in English with a focus on creative writing: getting a degree in English–especially one that focuses on creative writing–has absolutely jack to do with grammar, spelling, and punctuation. And yes, PRR had a perfect right to say his Ph.D. was in “writing.” It is. Creative writing. Not editing. Not professional writing. Not rhetoric and composition. But still writing. If you think he doesn’t formulate arguments well, don’t start whining about his Ph.D. Creative writing is NOT about formulating arguments!
Some day, I’m going to work up a great big pit thread about prescriptivism and descriptivism, and idiolects and language variation and why everyone who’s got such hot pants for “diversity” doesn’t tolerate it in language usage.
Agreed. I only noticed him during that scansion thread where he attacked another Doper for “incorrectly” scanning a line of poetry. He refused to explain what was wrong. And then he refused to apologize when it turned out that the other Doper was actually right in the first place.
So when he trumpets that he’s only interested in “fighting ignorance,” I can hardly take that seriously.
If anyone thinks this is new behavior for prr, I invite them to read the poetry train-wreck Dex, we’re very unclear. It’s fun for the whole fambly.
It seems to me that one of PRR’s hobbies around here is to make assertions about other folks, and then refuse to back them up with any concrete examples. For someone who claims that he is trying to “fight ignorance,” and that anything that can’t be proven must be invalid, this seems like a very odd approach, indeed.
I don’t think that I have shown up in “large numbers of threads” simply to attack his grammar. But if someone wants to provide links, I will stand corrected. I believe I have contributed to most of the threads in general discussions of the issues being presented.
I will take my chances with being considered a “harpy.” That term is usually used against only women. A stalker I am not. We end up in the same threads because we are interested in the same subject at the moment.
Back to PRR’s statement about what I said about his comments on Southern judges:
I checked out what PRR had to say about Southern judges. Although he was addressing Cicso’s experiences in the town he lived in and suggested that Cisco try litigation against the people who assaulted him, that gave PRR no reason to make the following statement which does not specify just judges from Cisco’s hometown or other rural judges. He speaks about Southern judges in general:
That was a blanket statement. He has the right to say it and I have the right to respond to his erroneous stereotyping of Southern judges.
I have been unable to find even one thread in which I have shown up solely for that purpose. I have found two threads, includiing this one, in which I have been critical of his grammar.
“Tomndebb, you are a hypocritical pussy”
In this thread he was corrected by someone else for altering a Doper’s quotation so that it slightly changed the meaning. He argued that his way of altering the quotation was acceptable. He was corrected by a Moderator citing the rules. This was after he himself had critized someone else for misspelling a word.
A few others posted comments on PRR’s language problems. Eventually, I became the sole commentator. No one challenged any correction that I made. I stand by all of them.
the current thread
In both of these threads I addressed issues having to do with religious beliefs. In the first thread, I posted beforePRR posted to the thread! That’s hardly a stalking behavior.
Finally, I ask you to look at this post, made after thread #1 and before thread #2. My efforts were still met with hostility. It just doesn’t matter to him.
If you find any threads which fit the description that you used, I would want to know about them.
Usually I am not critical of Dopers’ grammar or construction. I put down my big red pencil seventeen years ago and usually don’t think about how people write. No one should be paranoid in posting around me. I am paranoid about my own posts too. But considering the claims and the circumstances, my doubts were more than reasonable. My choice to express them may not have been. I am uncertain.
Zoe, you are right; I misspoke. I had intended to say “show up frequently in this thread” not “large numbers of threads.”
However, I now see that even that was an exaggeration. You appear to have mocked him a bit on his grammar and questioned his credentials four times in badchad’s attempt to Pit me. You then mocked him twice for grammar in this thread (with three other posts discussing his credentials with other posters , later). Since your two grammar challenges, here, were a bit unexpected and I had a memory of your exchanges from the earlier thread, it seemed as though you had launched a campaign, but I would agree that two snarky posts do not quite rise to the level of stalking. (I guess that since the grammar issue had laid dormant from Hallowe’en to Boxing Day, it was a bit of a surprise seeing it resurrected, again.)
To be fair to pseudotriton ruber ruber, I’d like to say that I have a master’s degree that was represented by the university as being in Creative Writing, but when the degree was conferred it was represented to me as a degree in English, and the diploma is in Latin. It says something like “English Literature and Also Creative Writing.” It’s a little hard to say what the degree is. How I describe it depends to some extent on the context in which I’m discussing it.
Also like pseudotriton ruber ruber, I have worked as a proofreader and have taught various topics in English (Composition and Creative Writing) at the college level. I’m a university professor and therapist.
Sometimes when I post, I’m inelegant. I ramble, my post isn’t organized, and my grammar and spelling are not always accurate.
If I were the subject of a Pitting, I’d hope that everyone would do better than mocking my writing skills or jumping on minutiae related to a degree I earned over 20 years ago. If there isn’t anything substantive left to Pit, perhaps it’s time to end the thread. I imagine that for some folks the mockery is enjoyable, just as for some, arguing is enjoyable for its own sake. For myself, I have to say that it detracts from the thread and seems like bullying, not like fighting ignorance or resolving disputes.
Shoshan, psuedotrito ruber ruber has started an Ask the Academic thread in MPSIMS. That will give him a chance to demonstrate his credentials to his satisfaction, or perhaps it will draw further lightning. (I hope not.) Either way, he seems to be taking the issue in hand.
What you say about inelegant, rambling posts is of course true for us all, pro or amateur alike. While I find some of prr’s… inelegance a bit jarring in view of his stated professional standing and his obvious passion for the subject matter, I don’t find it an important enough issue for contention or worry.
Did you plan on apologizing for these remarks or at least providing a little elaboration on why you felt the need to make them - or are you cool with leaving such rude and patently false comments hanging out there?
Shall we compare who has added the more reasonable, well-thought out, and valuable discourse to these discussions? Because it seems to me you’re just sniping and parroting what you think the majority wants to hear you say.
By the way, Liberal, I finally realized how you were misinterpreting my post #285 after reading it about 10 more times and I think what I posted in #300 explains what I meant pretty clearly, though I can’t help but notice that you’ve made no further comment on the matter. Do you still think I’m a MMO’H “handstabber”?
“Ah, there’s the rub. See, the thing is, an “Ask the Psychic” thread would be absolutely ripped to shreds and driven through with a speeding locomotive faster than you can say skepticism. In fact, that’s whole POINT of of this “war” that’s going on here at the SDMB right now. How have you not gotten that yet?”
You seemed to be subscribing to the “Think Like I Do or I’ll Make This Place So Miserable That You’ll Want to Leave” philosophy that is running rampant on these boards. That rules be damned, you were fighting a war on ignorance. And even if the thread specifically limited itself to information seeking (“Ask me about LDS”) and not a debate about its merits, that you would feel justified in “ripping it to threads.”
So I responded that, like President Bush, you were not exactly winning friends and influencing people with this particular “war” on ignorance. Most atheists have specifically distanced themselves from that m.o. because it’s elitist, obnoxious and disruptive.
If I misinterpreted your post, I apologize. If I didn’t, then I don’t.
Sorry for leaving this so long, I’ve been away and browsing/posting was difficult.
It looks as though you said that ripping [something] to shreds was the whole point of [something] (the second quote], then denied that you had ever said ripping things to shreds was the whole point of anything (the first one, which actually came afterwards)
That’s the root of my confusion here, if I was not supposed to read you as meaning that ripping [something] to shreds was the subject of the phrase “…that’s whole POINT of of this “war” that’s going on here at the SDMB right now…”, what was the subject supposed to be?
Can you not see that at the very least, you have made a statement that is possible to be read “Ripping [something] to shreds is the whole point of [something]” ? - it’s there almost verbatim, even if that wasn’t what you were attempting to mean.
