Rumor Mill decorum re getting personal

[not the list mom but]

A response to comments made in a "Hires" thread regarding naming individuals who have accepted positions:

Mar 23, 2010 9:30:47 GMT -5 @no way said:

...If that means others want to discuss their qualifications, that's the price you pay for using a site like this.

??? Those who have accepted offers are probably the least likely to be visiting this site. I doubt they are announcing their own hires. Why should they have to pay any "price" by having their qualifications judged by those whose own backgrounds have been repeatedly been deemed insufficient by multiple review boards (i.e. those most likely to be visiting this site)? (And yes, I'm in that group as well.)

Not that I have an objection to naming names -- but I think we should simply congratulate and keep our private evaluations to ourselves.

Mar 23, 2010 9:40:59 GMT -5 @yes said:

We've been at this (naming hires) for a while now and as far as I can tell there hasn't been a single "inappropriate discussion of whether the person was qualified relative to others who applied."

True, although I cringe even when I see the hiring institution getting slammed in the same thread because it has the effect of tainting the new hire. I question the sincerity of any "congratulations" in those cases where the message is "good luck -- your new employer sucks." The Jacksonville and Schuylkill posts come to mind.

Just keep in mind these posts are search-engine archived and permanent. I suppose the golden rule applies here, assuming that those of us less fortunate in this year's market can imagine how we would feel to have our future career choices critiqued in a public forum. I enjoy reading the dirt as much as anyone, but let's keep it separate from discussion of individual candidates. Just a few months ago, they were one of us...

[yanick]

While I agree that we shouldn't start discussions regarding whether or not the hire is qualified, the point seems moot because in the 2 years I've read the rumor mill there has yet to be a case where that happened.

Regarding info about departments: while people should be aware that in an anonymous forum all information should be taken with a grain of salt, I'm all for slamming the institutions that deserve slamming.

I mean, that is one of the purposes of the rumor mill, isn't it? To share information about departments that we would not otherwise have access to?

The academic labor market is inherently unequal in the division of power: the search committee will dig for any dirt on you, talk to references, sometimes talk to people at your institution who are not references, discuss all sorts of details about you, even the most personal. The candidate, on the other hand, is limited to smiling and nodding politely. This forum doesn't change that imbalance that much, but at least it serves to inform candidates of weird dealings in their profession. And if the departments themselves end up finding the discussions here, even better. Next time maybe they'll act differently.

[Anonyms]

Mar 24, 2010 3:30:19 GMT -5 @yanick said:

While I agree that we shouldn't start discussions regarding whether or not the hire is qualified, the point seems moot because in the 2 years I've read the rumor mill there has yet to be a case where that happened.

clearly you weren't here earlier this year when numerous discussions about *superstar who is the offspring of a superduperstar* were going on, in which names were named and qualifications were questioned

[speaking out]

Yes, we need to careful about the things we say but when faculty violate harassment policies this is about the only place we have to speak out. As long as victims remain silent the behavior can continue. Maybe some comments were made with the goal of personal healing and to warn others.

[yanick]

Mar 24, 2010 9:16:50 GMT -5 @Anonyms said:

Mar 24, 2010 3:30:19 GMT -5 @yanick said:

While I agree that we shouldn't start discussions regarding whether or not the hire is qualified, the point seems moot because in the 2 years I've read the rumor mill there has yet to be a case where that happened.

clearly you weren't here earlier this year when numerous discussions about *superstar who is the offspring of a superduperstar* were going on, in which names were named and qualifications were questioned

I was here, and as far as I know, while deplorable, those were not discussions about hires and whether or not they were qualified for the job they got. They were rumors about certain people being guaranteed certain jobs before searches were over, and have all been proven false at this point. That is very different from what was discussed here and the "hires" board where people didn't want to see hires being named.

[nonames]

In my opinion, the rumor mill is also not a place to make allegations about harassment or other inappropriate behavior by a faculty member during an interview. These are serious allegations. First, posting on the rumor mill will not do anything to rectify the situation. If you believe that someone's conduct was unethical or illegal, you should contact the appropriate authorities. What good does posting on the rumor mill do anyone? Second, as a previous poster pointed out, these "vague" accusations are archived here forever. No one here has any idea whether these allegations are true, who posted them, or who is even being accused of what, thus giving an entire department a bad name. Didn't you see that Judge Judy episode where the guy sued his ex-girlfriend for saying on myspace that he slept with prostitutes?

[fml]

That's ridiculous. Why in the world should any of the people who acted unprofessionally be protected on this forum? It's not our obligation to keep others from tarnishing the reputation of a faculty member or a department for that matter. Those people/ places are responsible for doing that to themselves.

Further, anyone who has been a victim of sexual harassment in academia (myself included) knows that "contacting the appropriate authorities" is an absolute joke. As has been noted by others on this site, we are totally powerless on this job market and the fact that a faculty member would take advantage of that disgusts me. I think this forum is a perfect way for the people who experienced unethical, offensive or even illegal treatment to anonymously stand up (without the fear of being retaliated against personally or professionally) and call attention to something that happened to them.

As far as I can tell, nobody has named names and the department in question sounds pretty clueless. Maybe somebody with a little sense there will see these posts and take action.

[nonames]

I never suggested "protecting" faculty who sexually harass someone. I'm sorry you jump to that conclusion--nothing could be farther from the truth. I find it ironic coming from someone who is obviously liberal-minded enough to be aware and concerned about issues of sexual harassment in the workplace would believe that not wanting to discuss these issues in a public form is akin to protecting these individuals. Twisting what I said into protecting faculty who engage in inappropriate conduct is as ridiculous as Republicans saying that a civilian trial for KSM means that President Obama wants to "protect terrorists." I'm sure you wouldn't agree with that, would you? It’s the basic idea that, individuals have the right to face their accuser and defend themselves. In this case, while someone may have behaved inappropriately, an entire department does not deserve to have a black cloud put over it where specific accusations cannot be made against specific individuals. And while you may think that official channels are useless for complaining based on your experiences, surely no one will ever take more seriously allegations made on a **rumor** mill. If every person who was harassed or victimized relied on a rumor mill for vindication, where would that get us?

[not the list mom but]

Consider:

If an undergraduate student came to you with a story about the inappropriate behavior of one of your colleagues, which action would you recommend the student take?

(1) File a formal complaint using the procedures established by the institution, or

(2) Post an anonymous allegation somewhere on the internet hoping that someone in the administration notices and takes the allegation seriously enough to start an investigation.

I don't buy the suggestion that as applicants we are powerless. Yes, there is a power differential, but rules and sanctions have been institutionalized. We know that they don't always work the way we might expect or want, that the power differential is still in place and the odds are always stacked against the accuser, but foregoing the official channels and using a rumor mill as a substitute for formal channels just perpetuates the situation because without an official complaint I can't imagine any authorities choosing to investigate further. Admittedly, in the case brought up in this forum, we actually don't know if any of the applicants raised this issue with powers that be. And I still don't have any idea how serious the charges are -- "inappropriate behavior" is pretty vague.

I do think it's entirely appropriate to characterize departments/schools as unprofessional, disorganized, hostile, etc. based on our experiences, and to name those institutions that don't treat us well. The main points I wanted to bring up included

-- I'm disappointed when those comments hijack the "who got hired" threads.

-- Some comments seem to cross the line. Character assassination or even just general mocking of specific faculty members is really unprofessional. If you can't see that and take pleasure in partaking in this anonymously, I hope I never have you as a colleague.

[curious]

I'm always curious: does it *feel* different to see things from a position of privilege?

[yanick]

Mar 24, 2010 16:59:53 GMT -5 @not the list mom but said:

Consider:

If an undergraduate student came to you with a story about the inappropriate behavior of one of your colleagues, which action would you recommend the student take?

(1) File a formal complaint using the procedures established by the institution, or

(2) Post an anonymous allegation somewhere on the internet hoping that someone in the administration notices and takes the allegation seriously enough to start an investigation.

I don't buy the suggestion that as applicants we are powerless. Yes, there is a power differential, but rules and sanctions have been institutionalized. We know that they don't always work the way we might expect or want, that the power differential is still in place and the odds are always stacked against the accuser, but foregoing the official channels and using a rumor mill as a substitute for formal channels just perpetuates the situation because without an official complaint I can't imagine any authorities choosing to investigate further. Admittedly, in the case brought up in this forum, we actually don't know if any of the applicants raised this issue with powers that be. And I still don't have any idea how serious the charges are -- "inappropriate behavior" is pretty vague.

I do think it's entirely appropriate to characterize departments/schools as unprofessional, disorganized, hostile, etc. based on our experiences, and to name those institutions that don't treat us well. The main points I wanted to bring up included

-- I'm disappointed when those comments hijack the "who got hired" threads.

-- Some comments seem to cross the line. Character assassination or even just general mocking of specific faculty members is really unprofessional. If you can't see that and take pleasure in partaking in this anonymously, I hope I never have you as a colleague.

You are conflating illegal behavior with inappropriate behavior. Though they are related, they are not the same. No one is suggesting anyone forgoes legal proceedings when the line into illegal sexual harassment is crossed.

But just as search committees will dig around for signs of unprofessionalism or other personal issues, this is where candidates can come to read about search committees' unprofessionalism.

Someone did something that is illegal? Report them.

Someone did something inappropriate, pass the word around. Search committees have no qualms about using their networks to dig for dirt, we shouldn't either.

[sadmemories20]

I mean, that is one of the purposes of the rumor mill, isn't it? To share information about departments that we would not otherwise have access to?



__________________
watch online movies