• 1 year - 42 posts - Latest - RSS
• OP: 1 Goods vs 0 No Goods
• Thread: 139 Goods vs 89 No Goods

1. Goldie
   

   He "preyed" on Graduate students in their 20s by coming on to them.
   This buries the lede, though--the allegation is that he offered to help advance her career in exchange for sex.
   I didn't follow the case so maybe his accuser isn't credible and if so, perhaps he was treated unfairly.
   Claims a poster's perception of a case is wrong. Proceeds on the next line to state they didn't "follow the case."
   lol

   I didn't follow the case closely either, but it's patently obvious Anselme's characterization is correct--to omit the proposed sex-for-career assistance part of the allegation is to mischaracterize it, in an effort to make it appear less serious than it is. Completely separate issue from trying to assess credibility.

   not very smart. LOL.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 0 NAY!

2. Eileen
   

   Anselme completely exposed in this thread.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 0 NAY!

Reply

Post <blockquote>lol yeah no, that's APSR. AJPS has two female lead editors, yes, but both respected scholars, and the associate editors include both men and women (3 men, 2 women). That's as close as you get to a 50/50 split as you can get with 7 people You realize that they were chosen because the previous editor got meetooed (for silly allegations) right? Or do you just have no clue what's going on our discipline? That’s a fact but nevertheless KD and JL simply are running the journal well. Obviously we can’t object to women editors per se. And even if they got the jobs due to silly calls for gender justice it doesn’t matter as long as they do well. In any case it’s clearly true AJPS is the only well run top 3 right now. meh. JL is no better than others.</blockquote>

Markup: a blockquote code em strong ul ol li.