Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

[_Jersey Girl]

Kevin,

1. For what reason would Ritner post confidential information ONLINE that he might plan to use in a potential lawsuit?

2. Isn't the truth that you are one who habitually produces confidential email online?

3. Why do you claim that you haven't the ability to respond on MAD when you obviously sockpuppeted your way into it?

4. See these bolded parts?

Kevin

I suspect that Ritner had legitimate gripes with the way Gee was using his Egyptology; possibly because was forwarding apologetic arguments for Mormonism. Gee, maybe realized Ritner wasn't comfortable with his "research" and that he was probably not going to sign off on his Ph.D. So he tried to act preemptively by complaining to the school. Kinda like how a job applicant runs to corporate and claims to have been denied because of race or sexual orientation. Gee probably threw in the "religious bigotry" card (you know, I am a religious minority and he hates Mormons!) which always stigamtizes Universities. Ritner was probably approached about this but eventually decided to leave on his own and Gee interpreted this the wrong way; meaning he believed his absence meant he was removed. But maybe Ritner just couldn't stand the sight of what was going to take place; an unworthy candidate being granted a doctorate because of discrimination charges. We all know discriminaion charges are powerful whether they are true or not. How Ritner responded to Gee as a prospect scholar was probably like how some assistant football coaches reject certain scrubs as prospective start players. Maybe he threw his hands up with a "If you want him you can have him" attitude. If Gee is ever proven to be a truly bad scholar, at least Ritner can say he wasn't involved in knighting him into academia's elite circles as a Ph.D.

That, buddy, is innuendo and speculation on your part about allegedly confidential matters between professionals for which you have no blessed business posting on this board. It's the kind of stuff that rumors are made of, the kind of stuff that is intended to publicly defame people...

you know....the same thing you accuse Gee and DCP of doing?


5. Now why don't you post this on your own board?

Spin your web someplace else.

Jersey Girl

[_The Dude]

It's a free for all.

[_Jersey Girl]

It's a free for all.

Correction. Kevin is a free for all. Has he posted this on his own board? Anyone know?

Jersey Girl

[_William Schryver]

We're talking about unchecked aggression here ...

[_maklelan]

We're talking about unchecked aggression here ...

It cannot stand, man.

[_Sethbag]

We're talking about unchecked aggression here ...

It cannot stand, man.

The Chicagoan is not the issue here, Dude.

[_Mister Scratch]

I suspect that Ritner had legitimate gripes with the way Gee was using his Egyptology; possibly because was forwarding apologetic arguments for Mormonism. Gee, maybe realized Ritner wasn't comfortable with his "research" and that he was probably not going to sign off on his Ph.D. So he tried to act preemptively by complaining to the school. Kinda like how a job applicant runs to corporate and claims to have been denied because of race or sexual orientation. Gee probably threw in the "religious bigotry" card (you know, I am a religious minority and he hates Mormons!) which always stigamtizes Universities. Ritner was probably approached about this but eventually decided to leave on his own and Gee interpreted this the wrong way; meaning he believed his absence meant he was removed. But maybe Ritner just couldn't stand the sight of what was going to take place; an unworthy candidate being granted a doctorate because of discrimination charges. We all know discriminaion charges are powerful whether they are true or not. How Ritner responded to Gee as a prospect scholar was probably like how some assistant football coaches reject certain scrubs as prospective start players. Maybe he threw his hands up with a "If you want him you can have him" attitude. If Gee is ever proven to be a truly bad scholar, at least Ritner can say he wasn't involved in knighting him into academia's elite circles as a Ph.D.

In any event, Gee and Dan have made it perfectly clear that Ritner was "removed" by the school, and they have further implied that this is supposed to speak volumes about Ritner's "axe to grind" against Gee. It is their rehearsed argument for years now.

Contra Gee and Peterson, Ritner claims that he was the one who bowed out. He wasn't forced out by the school and he claims to have evidence to that effect.

Given Gee's history of misleading and twisting facts, I'm inclined to believe Ritner's side.

You know, Kevin, I am just blown away by all of this. The thing I am struck the most with is the fact that Gee somehow had Ritner jettisoned from his committee. Not only was Ritner simply some humdrum mere member of the committee, but he was the chair. I don't know how many people on this board understand the gravity of this, but this is a huge, significant, major-league deal. A Ph.D. candidate's chair is someone with whom the candidate has developed a personal, intellectual, and professional relationship over a period of years. To think that a committee chair was just simply jettisoned in this manner is unheard of, at least in my experience. Gee must truly be a far-out-there degenerate in terms of scholarship. Either that, or he is totally devoid of tact and diplomacy skills.

[_Mister Scratch]

Kevin,

1. For what reason would Ritner post confidential information ONLINE that he might plan to use in a potential lawsuit?

Probably for the same reason that DCP would threaten litigation. Oh, but then again, you wouldn't understand any of this, since you are only "out for yourself."

2. Isn't the truth that you are one who habitually produces confidential email online?

Isn't the truth that you are the one who continually tries to assert moral authority on the basis of little more than a correspondence course education and a "tough Jersey chick" attitude? Who in the hell do *YOU* think you are?

3. Why do you claim that you haven't the ability to respond on MAD when you obviously sockpuppeted your way into it?

Uh, have you not used multiple aliases yourself, such as Lady Sundancer? Oh, wait, that's right: you're not actually criticizing anyone, nor does your criticism have any weight or real meaning, since this is all fun and games for you. You're not on anyone's side. It's just about Jersey Girl.

4. See these bolded parts?

Kevin

I suspect that Ritner had legitimate gripes with the way Gee was using his Egyptology; possibly because was forwarding apologetic arguments for Mormonism. Gee, maybe realized Ritner wasn't comfortable with his "research" and that he was probably not going to sign off on his Ph.D. So he tried to act preemptively by complaining to the school. Kinda like how a job applicant runs to corporate and claims to have been denied because of race or sexual orientation. Gee probably threw in the "religious bigotry" card (you know, I am a religious minority and he hates Mormons!) which always stigamtizes Universities. Ritner was probably approached about this but eventually decided to leave on his own and Gee interpreted this the wrong way; meaning he believed his absence meant he was removed. But maybe Ritner just couldn't stand the sight of what was going to take place; an unworthy candidate being granted a doctorate because of discrimination charges. We all know discriminaion charges are powerful whether they are true or not. How Ritner responded to Gee as a prospect scholar was probably like how some assistant football coaches reject certain scrubs as prospective start players. Maybe he threw his hands up with a "If you want him you can have him" attitude. If Gee is ever proven to be a truly bad scholar, at least Ritner can say he wasn't involved in knighting him into academia's elite circles as a Ph.D.

That, buddy, is innuendo and speculation on your part about allegedly confidential matters between professionals for which you have no blessed business posting on this board. It's the kind of stuff that rumors are made of, the kind of stuff that is intended to publicly defame people...

you know....the same thing you accuse Gee and DCP of doing?

Right. And you "aren't on anybody's side". You are so full of crap your breath stinks.

5. Now why don't you post this on your own board?

Spin your web someplace else.

Jersey Girl

I seem to recall you saying to me, "I never tell anyone what to do!" Again, let it ring loud and clear: you are full of crap.

[_Polygamy Porter]

Liars for the lord.

This quote from Ritner concerning Danny is a classic!:

In any case, whoever he is,

Poor Danny, no one knows or even cares who you are.

Wasting his life, lyin' for the lord... tsk tsk

[_Polygamy Porter]

Right. And you "aren't on anybody's side". You are so full of crap your breath stinks.

Kevin,
5. Now why don't you post this on your own board?

Spin your web someplace else.

Jersey Girl

I seem to recall you saying to me, "I never tell anyone what to do!" Again, let it ring loud and clear: you are full of crap.

Pass the mega-pep-o-mint breath mints east. Soon Vicki will be apologizing to Kev, like she did to Kerry (I wear my garments under my) Shirts...