Proof of PhD Fraud, [BC3K]
Bill Huffman
Dan Brook has requested that some minor inaccuracies in my "proof"
be cleaned up. I think I have a better idea what he meant now.
I know that Dan and Derek Smart do not like the conclusion. That
is what helps makes this "proof" such a wonderful trolling device
for the on-line game. The other part that makes this such a
wonderful contribution to the game is the fact that it is true.
That is why I really do appreciate Dan's research, comments, and
persistence. Thank you, Dan, and I'm looking forward to your future
criticisms.
INTRODUCTION
Derek has claimed to have a PhD in every post he's made that I've seen
(except for his posts I saw on 1/22/98). Historically (prior to Aug.
1997), whenever anyone had asked about details he was strangely silent.
The biggest braggart many have ever seen being silent on such occasions
seemed very "out of character". This coupled with my observation of
many months of Derek lies, lead me to conclude that Derek's PhD was
likely fake. After gathering further evidence, I believe this is now
an inescapable conclusion.
SUMMARY
Here's the proof that Derek's PhD is a fraud. It consists of three
firmly established facts. These facts taken together, prove that his PhD
is a fraud. Derek has not earned a PhD at any accredited university.
FACT 1: Derek Smart's PhD dissertation is not listed anywhere.
All published PhD dissertations are listed in DAI or somewhere.
FACT 2: Derek is unable to provide simple information.
Derek is unable to name his alma mater, among other things.
FACT 3: Derek Smart has changed the story about his PhD.
He said his dissertation was published now, he says it's not.
VERIFICATION
It's very important to note that everything stated here has been
verified by multiple people and can be verified by you. You may visit
your local college library to verify that published dissertations
should be listed in DAI or somewhere. You may look in www.dejanews.com
to verify the rest. The most interesting period is between the dates
of about 8/24/97 and about 9/9/97. The most interesting threads
being "Derek Smart = Habitual Liar", "Proof - Derek PhD NOT!",
and "DEREK SMART - PhD?". For those of you that are less research
oriented, Fthx has collected together much of the most interesting
material in http://members.aol.com/fthx/bc3k in the PhD Fraud
Anthology collections. DerekSmartPhDFraudAnthology2.txt contains
the full posts and DerekSmartPhDFraudAnthology.txt contains the
parts of the posts that are most interesting.
FACT 1: Derek Smart's dissertation is not listed.
Almost all PhD candidates are required to write a PhD dissertation
(thesis). Even though Derek claims to have done a dissertation,
it is not listed. Derek has said that his PhD dissertation title
was "Artificial Intelligence & the art of computerized thinking".
He has also said it was entitled "The Art of Computerized Thinking".
Every dissertation ever published is collected together by the
school to facilitate the further advancement of academic research
and human knowledge. The vast majority of colleges use UMI/DAI.
This list is available on CD-ROM at most colleges around the world.
It's called Dissertation Abstracts International (DAI). Upon searching
this information, no Derek Smart shows up. No dissertation with the
title Derek claims for his dissertation shows up. (A complete list
of what was searched by one librarian is at the end.)
The search was done and verified by multiple people. Multiple people
reported that different librarians have said that it should be in the
records, if he had a PhD. The records covered the USA, Canada and most
of western Europe and all the way back to 1861.
Derek Smart now admits that his dissertation has never been
published and is not listed. (See copy of post at the end.)
Because of a misunderstanding that Dan Brook had, I'd like to point
out that I'm not claiming that nonpublished dissertations are listed.
FACT 2: Derek is unable to provide simple information.
There are two very simple pieces of information that Derek has
never been able to provide. This would be well known and simple
for anyone that had really earned a PhD.
The first thing that Derek has never reasonably explained is:
How did he get a PhD without publishing or listing his dissertation?
The only explanation Derek has ever given is that he suppressed
publication because he wanted to keep his secret BC3K neural network
code a secret. There have been at least two posts from PhDs in this
news group (c.s.i.p.g.s.) that have stated that a PhD candidate cannot
suppress publication on their own, without withdrawing from the
program. The primary owner of the dissertation is the school. If the
candidate withdraws from the PhD program then, they don't get a PhD.
The most important bit of information that Derek has never been able
to reveal is his college. The standard response when someone asks
for details about a claimed PhD is to name the school. It's very
suspicious to not give this information when asked. Derek has been
asked many times. He has said that he studied only part time. He's
said that he studied in the USA and England. He's seemed to imply
that it was a mail order college. He's more recently seemed to say
it was in England. He is not able to provide the name of his
school because, it would be a simple matter to call the college
administration office and verify that Derek never earned a PhD there.
Here are the reasons Derek has claimed he's "unwilling" to name
his alma mater. (in approximate chronological order)
1. You do your homework.(B.H. Mar '97, told to editors of PCGamer&Boot)
2. I have a bet with Bill Huffman, though he won't take it.
3. I want Bill Huffman to have to pay for this.
4. I will not be blackmailed.
5. It is personal information. (B.H. On a contradictory note, he says
it will be in his biography that is currently being done. From August
to about November 1997, this seemed to be Derek's main reason.)
6. If I reveal my alma mater then, the detractors will just find
something else to flame me about. (B.H. This is an extra lame attempt
because I have said that if his PhD is validated I will write a public
apology and never post to a Derek Smart thread again. Other
detractors have said they would also abide by this.)
7. The detractors will just make fun of my school.
(B.H. This is extra lame for the same reason as number 6.)
8. The detractors will bother my professors. (B.H. Degree
validation is handled by administration clerks not, professors.)
9. I don't want people bothering my school. (B.H. This is lame
because administration clerks respond to requests for degree
validation very quickly and efficiently. To get a copy of a
dissertation, it costs about $75 so, librarians wouldn't be
bothered either.)
10. It might break the frame to scan my diploma.
11. I have my reasons. (B.H. currently Derek's favorite)
FACT 3: Derek Smart has changed his story.
In my opinion, the sure sign of a big lie is when the liar changes
his story. Derek has done this on too many occasions for me to be
able to describe them all here. The changes to Derek's story that
are most problematical for him, involve his dissertation.
Derek said his dissertation was published and listed. When I said it
couldn't be found then, Derek said I was a liar. He said it wasn't
possible to search worldwide for a dissertation. He said it was
"published and listed" and he pleaded that no one else should search.
When other people said they couldn't find it either then, he said
that the searches failed because his real name is Derek K?????-Smart.
He refused to reveal his K???? name, only that it began with the
letter K. When searches were done that proved that there was no
K??????-Smart with a dissertation, he changed his story again and
admitted it was never listed or published.
Another part of the story that Derek has changed is about the bet he
made with me August 1997. I challenged him to name his school because,
I thought his PhD was likely fake. He responded by saying that he
would bet me that each one of his 3 degrees (math & CS) is valid for
6 months of my salary for each degree. He's now changed his story and
is saying the bet was that I couldn't find his dissertation. His
dissertation was not mentioned until I exposed that Derek had never
published or listed a dissertation. I believe Derek said this lie to
try and cover up his lie about his dissertation being published.
Both of Derek's story changes can be verified by going to
http://members.aol.com/fthx/bc3k/DerekSmartPhDFraudAnthology2.txt.
This last story change will also require you to reference a copy
of a part of a post at the end of this proof.
CONCLUSION
If someone claims they have a PhD and their thesis couldn't be found,
you'd be suspicious. If they claimed they did a dissertation to get
a PhD and it couldn't be found anywhere you'd be very suspicious
of the PhD. If someone claims they have a PhD but, won't name their
school, you'd be very suspicious. If they could name their school
and put to shame and be rid of a bunch "detractors" but, still don't
name their school, you'd have to be extremely suspicious. When you
add these facts together with the extremely suspicious fact that very
important parts of Derek's "PhD story" have changed, I believe it
proves that Derek doesn't have a PhD, beyond any reasonable doubt.
RELEVENCE
The point of Derek's PhD being proven a fraud, from my point of view,
is that it proves that Derek Smart is a habitual liar. It is
irrelevant when it comes to evaluating whether or not BC3K is a good
or bad game. It is very relevant and fun for BC3K the online game.
It should be very relevant when it comes to evaluating the truth in
whatever Derek is saying.
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTATION - LIBRARIAN'S SEARCH
Searches were also done for anything published by Derek Smart.
Here is where one professional librarian searched.
the Dissertations Abstract Online
Sci Search.
UMI- both on line and telephone
IEEE and IE(UK) database from 1988 forward. Doesn't seem he
has written anything for those pubs.
ACM Guide to all ACM Pubs. no luck
OCLC online nothing no books, dissertation, or papers
Stanford Technical papers database
Cambridge UK Technical papers database. These also came up
empty.
The point of all these failed searches is that we were trying to
establish if Derek was ever enrolled in a post graduate program
anywhere. This couldn't be done since all searches came up empty.
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTATION - COPY OF A DEREK SMART POST
This is a partial copy of a post that shows that Derek now admits
that his dissertation is not listed or published. It also shows
that Derek has tried to change his story on the bet when you
compare this to the actual bet in
http://members.aol.com/fthx/bc3k/DerekSmartPhDFraudAnthology2.txt
From: dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
Subject: Re: Question for Derek
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Newsgroups: alt.games.bc3000ad
Organization: 3000AD
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 97 16:17:10 +0000
...snip...
When Bill took off looking for my thesis, I knew for a fact that
he wouldn't find it but I was curious to see where it would go. Now, why on
Earth would I challenge him, to the extent of putting out a bet and given the
nature of the comms medium, to find it?
...snip the rest .....
---------
Unfortunately for Derek, he got tangled in his own web of lies. He
thought he could claim that the lies that his dissertation was published
could all be dispositioned as trying to get me to go on a wild goose
chase. However, he forgot that he had told the PCGamer and Boot magazine
editors to look up his dissertation back in March 1997.
(See Fthx's collection.)
Dan Brooks
Nice try, Bill.
But it's not *quite there* yet. The lack of logic in some critical areas
is still fatal.
Dan
Brian Bax
Bill, why do you keep posting this? Does this really help?
You changed the words around but it doesn't amount to anything? Two
people have shown DAI and UMi are not comprehensive. You're proof has no
weight. Do you post this just to annoy Derek or get people to respond to
your posts? You want to believe that Derek has a bogus degree, fine. You
don't have to state you opinion on the issue, I'm sure it's blatantly
clear to all of us by now. Please stop wasting our time with this useless
dribble until you have something mor substantive than your dislike of
Derek for the on-line game.
Of course you've never adressed a supressed dissertation at all in
this proof of yours. You also have never been able to have anyone with a
PhD is CS to say it's totally impossible under any circumstance to have a
supressed PHd.
You may have missed my post on the subject Bill, so here it is:
So I actually went to the library to check out Bill "airtight"
verification about DAI. I went to the reference section to read about
DAI since we have the hard-bound copies and not the CD-ROM. This CAN
be verified, unlike Bill's claims with his librarian.
The following is referenced from:
Dissertation Abstracts International
Part B-the Sciences and Engineering
Volume 58, No. 1
July 1997 [They don't have a more recent copy yet]
page iii
It follows:
Dissertation Abstract International (DAI) is published monthly by
UMI Company and includes abstracts of doctoral dissertations submitted to
UMI by 550 participating institutions in North America and throughout the
world.
Each author-prepared abstract, upto 350 words in length, describes
in detail the original research project on which the dissertation is
based. MOST [NOT ALL] of the approximately 45,000 dissertations published
by UMI each year are abstracted in DAI and may be purchased in microfilm
or as paper copies.
DAI is published in three sections:
[Section A+B are just sections of various academic disciplines, CS
is in Section B].
Section C- Worlwide (formerely European Abstracts) is publsihed
quarterly and includes abstracts of dissertations in all disciplines
accepted for doctoral and post-doctoral degrees at institutions throughout
the world. Most of these dissertations ARE NOT AVAILABLE FROM UMI [which
is the only databse DAI uses]; those which are for sale are also listed in
Section A or B. Beginning with Volume 50 (spring 1989), DAI-C was
expanded to include institutions worldwide.
What does this show? DAI admits that they are not a
comprehenisve
dissertation archive database. They only use the UMI database. so if you
went to a school that wasn't one of those 550 schools YOU WOULD NEVER SHOW
UP IN DAI. Even so, they don't list all of the ones submitted to them.
Talking with my librabrian, she told met that if you did your
thesis in Europe as in France, the filing system is completely different
than the American one. It has been suggested that Derek did his work
abroad so it would be very easy to miss him in DAI. More importantly
if Derek did do his degree abroad greater than eight years ago (which is
very possible since he's been working on BC3K for 7-8 years) HE WOULD
NEVER SHOW ON DAI. Again, HE WOULD NEVER SHOW UP ON DAI. It's a current
database, not retroactive one.
So DAI by their own admission states that they are not a
comprehensive database. What does this mean. I'll reiterate what Dan
said. Bill's initial premise that DAI has all PhD abstracts is TOTALLY
BOGUS. I've posted several times that is was likely that DAI is not a
comprehensive database, a good one, but not all inclusive.
*Snipped rest*
The rest is speculation. You can believe whatever you want about
Derek and his credentials, Bill. Your stance will never change. That's
one of the freedoms we enjoy here in America, you can choose what you want
to believe. you made that abundantly clear. Not let it rest and talk
about something else.
Brian Bax
Chris Holko
"Dan Brooks" <comput...@email.msn.com> blithered:
Got one question, as I don't usually read these things.. however I do have
his not-so-working game...
If he truly has a PhD then what does he have to lose by revealing the school
it is from, and the date he acquired it?
To not provide such simple information is only to foster the suspicion.
If he is embarrased about the school or such then why bother with mentioning
the fact he has a PhD?
Just asking...
Chris
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
Jimmy Chan
Brian Bax (bm...@taurus.oac.uci.edu) wrote:
:# Bill, why do you keep posting this? Does this really help?
:#You changed the words around but it doesn't amount to anything? Two
:#people have shown DAI and UMi are not comprehensive. You're proof has no
:#weight.
Well considering that DS hasn't proven that he has a PhD, it doesn't carry
any weight either.
:#Do you post this just to annoy Derek or get people to respond to
:#your posts?
So, why did DS used to post that he has a PhD in his .sig? Is it to get
people to respond to his posts?
:#Please stop wasting our time with this useless
:#dribble until you have something mor substantive than your dislike of
:#Derek for the on-line game.
Shouldn't DS have stopped claiming that he has a PhD in his posts until he
had something more substantive than trying to claim respect because of his
failure as a games developer?
--
==============================ji...@hawaii.edu===============================
Dan Brooks
Brian Bax wrote in message ...
>
>
> Bill, why do you keep posting this? Does this really help?
>You changed the words around but it doesn't amount to anything? Two
>people have shown DAI and UMi are not comprehensive. You're proof has no
>weight. Do you post this just to annoy Derek or get people to respond to
>your posts
> So DAI by their own admission states that they are not a
>comprehensive database. What does this mean. I'll reiterate what Dan
>said. Bill's initial premise that DAI has all PhD abstracts is TOTALLY
>BOGUS. I've posted several times that is was likely that DAI is not a
>comprehensive database, a good one, but not all inclusive.
>
>
> *Snipped rest*
>
> The rest is speculation. You can believe whatever you want about
>Derek and his credentials, Bill. Your stance will never change. That's
>one of the freedoms we enjoy here in America, you can choose what you want
>to believe. you made that abundantly clear. Not let it rest and talk
>about something else.
>
> Brian Bax
I'm with you. Bill will likely continue to post his trash, but I've made my
point.
Dan
Dan Brooks
Another one of those "he made me do it" defenses.
Dan Brooks
========================
Computer Rescue
St. Louis, MO
comput...@msn.com
========================
Jimmy Chan wrote in message <6abrck$a...@news.Hawaii.Edu>...
Dan Brooks
Chris Holko wrote in message <34c90705...@nntp3.mindspring.com>...
>"Dan Brooks" <comput...@email.msn.com> blithered:
>
>>Nice try, Bill.
>>
>>But it's not *quite there* yet. The lack of logic in some critical areas
>>is still fatal.
>>
>>Dan
>>
>
>Got one question, as I don't usually read these things.. however I do have
>his not-so-working game...
>
>If he truly has a PhD then what does he have to lose by revealing the
school
>it is from, and the date he acquired it?
You'd have to read some of Derek's posts to get it straight from him. Any
second hand explanation would be purely self-serving.
>To not provide such simple information is only to foster the suspicion.
I agree. It does. But there is a game going on here. The focus would
simply shift to another facet, and the whole point of revealing the info
would probably be moot. I don't know if he has one. Frankly, I think it's
stupid to care so much if he does or doesn't.
>If he is embarrased about the school or such then why bother with
mentioning
>the fact he has a PhD?
Where did he say he was embarrassed?
>Just asking...
Probably better to let it die.
Dan
Riboflavin
Michael Bay wrote in message <34CA4E...@bellsouth.net>...
>I realize you can't post anything other than your knee-jerk "please
>don't hurt Derek" lines. A defense of what, you moron?
[snip - more anti-Dan stuff]
I think it's pretty clear that all Dan wants to do is play word games. He
rails on Bill about the use of the word 'proof', pretends like he
misunderstands questions, deliberately misinterprets what people say so he
can play the victim, and applies completely different standards to 'Derek'
and 'everyone else'.
But it's easy for him to be a coward from behind his keyboard, right?
--
Kevin Allegood ri...@mindspring.com
No estoy desgastando ninguna pantalones. Película en 11.
Je ne porte aucun pantalon. Film à 11.
Ich trage keine Hosen. Film bei 11.
Non sto portando alcuni pantaloni. Pellicola a 11.
Eu não estou desgastando nenhumas calças. Película em 11.
Gno mou shiok fu, sap yat tim yau siu sek.
Pantsless in 7 languages!
Brian Bax
On 24 Jan 1998, Jimmy Chan wrote:
> Brian Bax (bm...@taurus.oac.uci.edu) wrote:
> :# Bill, why do you keep posting this? Does this really help?
> :#You changed the words around but it doesn't amount to anything? Two
> :#people have shown DAI and UMi are not comprehensive. You're proof has no
> :#weight.
>
> Well considering that DS hasn't proven that he has a PhD, it doesn't carry
> any weight either.
Actually it is. Bill is out to slander Derek. Derek has made his
statements on the issue, and you can choose which side to be on. You've
already made it abundantly clear which side your on. However, Derek
doesn't post his canned rebuttal to unrelated to threads
just to annoy Bill. However, Bil does to Derek. That's the difference.
> :#Do you post this just to annoy Derek or get people to respond to
> :#your posts?
>
> So, why did DS used to post that he has a PhD in his .sig? Is it to get
> people to respond to his posts?
Hell Jimmy, why does anyone have a .sig on this newsgroup? There
are thousands or reasons. I'm not going to muck through all of them now.
>
> :#Please stop wasting our time with this useless
> :#dribble until you have something mor substantive than your dislike of
> :#Derek for the on-line game.
>
> Shouldn't DS have stopped claiming that he has a PhD in his posts until he
> had something more substantive than trying to claim respect because of his
> failure as a games developer?
Well at least you got in failed game developer. What happened to
scam artist and liar? You usually can't resist using those. He said
supressed dissertation? Do you have any info to prove his claims false?
Otherwise he should be able to claim what he wants.
Brian Bax
---
Brian Bax
"To be loved by all is to compromise one's soul"
bm...@ea.oac.uci.edu
Michael Bay
> >:# Bill, why do you keep posting this? Does this really help?
> >:#You changed the words around but it doesn't amount to anything? Two
> >:#people have shown DAI and UMi are not comprehensive. You're proof has no
> >:#weight.
> >
> >Well considering that DS hasn't proven that he has a PhD, it doesn't carry
> >any weight either.
> >
> >:#your posts?
> >
> >So, why did DS used to post that he has a PhD in his .sig? Is it to get
> >people to respond to his posts?
> >
> >:#dribble until you have something mor substantive than your dislike of
> >:#Derek for the on-line game.
> >
> >Shouldn't DS have stopped claiming that he has a PhD in his posts until he
> >had something more substantive than trying to claim respect because of his
> >failure as a games developer?
>
>
> Dan Brooks
No it isn't you dipshit. It isn't a defense, it's a question, one that
has been answered by Derek with lies and evasions.
I realize you can't post anything other than your knee-jerk "please
don't hurt Derek" lines. A defense of what, you moron?
Of asking questions about Derek's claims? The man has lied repeatedly,
lies that you yourself can verify via Dejanews.
Yet, you defend him? Or is it that you don't think people should
question whether Derek has an advanced degree? Derek
knows that he would have cut off all discussion of his PhD Fraud by
simply releasing the name of the granting institution.
Yes, yes, he's _so_ afraid that institution would be hassled by people
wanting to verify his claim to a PhD. But, if he hadn't
been caught lying so often in the past two years, people wouldn't
question his claims at all. If you get on the usenet and run your
mouth, you have to expect people to question your claims. Derek isn't a
victim here. If that's too much for you, Dan, then why
don't you just go back to your "Gomer Pyle" reruns and get mad about how
mean Sgt. Carter was to Gomer.
Jimmy Chan
Riboflavin (ri...@mindspring.com) wrote:
:#Michael Bay wrote in message <34CA4E...@bellsouth.net>...
:#>I realize you can't post anything other than your knee-jerk "please
:#>don't hurt Derek" lines. A defense of what, you moron?
:#[snip - more anti-Dan stuff]
:#I think it's pretty clear that all Dan wants to do is play word games. He
:#rails on Bill about the use of the word 'proof', pretends like he
:#misunderstands questions, deliberately misinterprets what people say so he
:#can play the victim, and applies completely different standards to 'Derek'
:#and 'everyone else'.
Yep, that sounds like Dan alright. He never seems to answer the questions,
only tends to misinterpret them or seems to misinterpret them. Not much
sense trying to go into long discussions with Dan as he seems to be lost
after the first post. I'll let Baz go into discussions with him as they
seem to be able to communicate better with each other...8-).
--
==============================ji...@hawaii.edu===============================
Jimmy Chan
Brian Bax (bm...@rigel.oac.uci.edu) wrote:
:#On 24 Jan 1998, Jimmy Chan wrote:
:#> Well considering that DS hasn't proven that he has a PhD, it doesn't carry
:#> any weight either.
:# Actually it is. Bill is out to slander Derek. Derek has made his
:#statements on the issue, and you can choose which side to be on. You've
:#already made it abundantly clear which side your on. However, Derek
:#doesn't post his canned rebuttal to unrelated to threads
:#just to annoy Bill. However, Bil does to Derek. That's the difference.
Why should DS saying he has a PhD be something I believe in? Why should
anyone believe it, just because he said so? If Derek would offer
verifiable proof of his PhD, Bill has promised to stop posting on the PhD
debacle. Why is it that there are so many posters asking DS where did he
get his PhD? Surely not because they believe him.
:#> So, why did DS used to post that he has a PhD in his .sig? Is it to get
:#> people to respond to his posts?
:# Hell Jimmy, why does anyone have a .sig on this newsgroup? There
:#are thousands or reasons. I'm not going to muck through all of them now.
Please show me how many are putting PhD's after their name and telling
people to call them Dr. when they haven't earned it nor are willing to
provide evidence that they've earned it. Upon skimming thru Dejanews, the
earliest that I could find DS putting PhD after his name and telling people
that he received a PhD in Computer Science is Feb. 21, 1996, mysteriously
this .sig with the PhD attached only came about after many posters were
getting fed up with the promises of the game will be ready. All of DS's
previous posts before that day there was no sign of a PhD in his .sig.
:#> Shouldn't DS have stopped claiming that he has a PhD in his posts until he
:#> had something more substantive than trying to claim respect because of his
:#> failure as a games developer?
:# Well at least you got in failed game developer. What happened to
:#scam artist and liar? You usually can't resist using those. He said
:#supressed dissertation? Do you have any info to prove his claims false?
:#Otherwise he should be able to claim what he wants.
Can you disprove that he is a liar? Can you disprove that he's a scam
artist? I can prove both. If DS can claim whatever he wants then I and
anyone else can claim that he doesn't have a PhD also, what difference?
--
==============================ji...@hawaii.edu===============================
Dan Brooks
Too much logic in one post, Brian. Don't expect it all to be absorbed at
once.
Dan Brooks
========================
Computer Rescue
St. Louis, MO
comput...@msn.com
========================
Brian Bax wrote in message ...
>
>
>
>On 24 Jan 1998, Jimmy Chan wrote:
>
>> Brian Bax (bm...@taurus.oac.uci.edu) wrote:
>> :# Bill, why do you keep posting this? Does this really help?
>> :#You changed the words around but it doesn't amount to anything? Two
>> :#people have shown DAI and UMi are not comprehensive. You're proof has
no
>> :#weight.
>>
>> Well considering that DS hasn't proven that he has a PhD, it doesn't
carry
>> any weight either.
>
> Actually it is. Bill is out to slander Derek. Derek has made his
>statements on the issue, and you can choose which side to be on. You've
>already made it abundantly clear which side your on. However, Derek
>doesn't post his canned rebuttal to unrelated to threads
>just to annoy Bill. However, Bil does to Derek. That's the difference.
>
>
>
>> :#Do you post this just to annoy Derek or get people to respond to
>> :#your posts?
>>
>> So, why did DS used to post that he has a PhD in his .sig? Is it to get
>> people to respond to his posts?
>
> Hell Jimmy, why does anyone have a .sig on this newsgroup? There
>are thousands or reasons. I'm not going to muck through all of them now.
>
>>
>> :#Please stop wasting our time with this useless
>> :#dribble until you have something mor substantive than your dislike of
>> :#Derek for the on-line game.
>>
>> Shouldn't DS have stopped claiming that he has a PhD in his posts until
he
>> had something more substantive than trying to claim respect because of
his
>> failure as a games developer?
>
> Well at least you got in failed game developer. What happened to
>scam artist and liar? You usually can't resist using those. He said
>supressed dissertation? Do you have any info to prove his claims false?
>Otherwise he should be able to claim what he wants.
>
Dan Brooks
Ask, Jimmy-boy, ask.
Dan Brooks
========================
Computer Rescue
St. Louis, MO
comput...@msn.com
========================
Jimmy Chan wrote in message <6ae1o6$m...@news.Hawaii.Edu>...
Brian Bax
On 25 Jan 1998, Jimmy Chan wrote:
>
> Why should DS saying he has a PhD be something I believe in? Why should
> anyone believe it, just because he said so? If Derek would offer
> verifiable proof of his PhD, Bill has promised to stop posting on the PhD
> debacle. Why is it that there are so many posters asking DS where did he
> get his PhD? Surely not because they believe him.
Didn't say you had to; you don't, that's ok. Why does anyone
believe anything anyone says on Usenet? Maybe we're all a bunch of liars.
Derek can claim anything he wants and you can claim anything as well.
However you, and only you, are responsible for what to believe. You can
reason what to believe and what not with your own faculties. As regards
tp Bill to stop posting if Derek names his school is pretty much
elementary at this point. Bill kept posting his bogus proof even after
both Dan and I separately found that his initial premise was wrong. He
definitely won't stop. Neither will you. People ask where DS got his
degree because it's the easiest way to settle the whole issue. However,
it won't stop and Derek has chosen the harder path to go by.
>
> Please show me how many are putting PhD's after their name and telling
> people to call them Dr. when they haven't earned it nor are willing to
> provide evidence that they've earned it. Upon skimming thru Dejanews, the
> earliest that I could find DS putting PhD after his name and telling people
> that he received a PhD in Computer Science is Feb. 21, 1996, mysteriously
> this .sig with the PhD attached only came about after many posters were
> getting fed up with the promises of the game will be ready. All of DS's
> previous posts before that day there was no sign of a PhD in his .sig.
I've seen a couple who have stated it and not mentioned their alma
maters; but then, they're not Derek are they? No one else has been
closely scrutanized because they had a degree and didn't back it up.
As for when Derek started his .sig it's all arbitrary as to why he did
it. Ask him yourself if you're interested. It's before my time I'll
admit I don't know..
> :# Well at least you got in failed game developer. What happened to
> :#scam artist and liar? You usually can't resist using those. He said
> :#supressed dissertation? Do you have any info to prove his claims false?
> :#Otherwise he should be able to claim what he wants.
>
> Can you disprove that he is a liar? Can you disprove that he's a scam
> artist? I can prove both. If DS can claim whatever he wants then I and
> anyone else can claim that he doesn't have a PhD also, what difference?
As with promoting his game before it was released and not warning
the public, then I have a game for you, it's called Ultima Online ;).
But seriously, Derek can be a liar, as you cliam, he can be a scam artist,
as you claim, he can also have a PhD and be all three. They're not
mutually exclusive, however you want to twist it. You assume that you're
first premise of lying totally excludes him from ever getting an advanced
degree. You're wrong. You may not want to admit it, but it's true.
Besides Jimmy, would a scam artist put all of his work to patch a game
that didn't work? I think you give the person some credit.
Bill Huffman
In article <Pine.GSO.3.96.980124...@rigel.oac.uci.edu>,
Brian Bax <bm...@rigel.oac.uci.edu> wrote:
...snip...
> Bill is out to slander Derek. Derek has made his
>statements on the issue, and you can choose which side to be on. You've
>already made it abundantly clear which side your on. However, Derek
>doesn't post his canned rebuttal to unrelated to threads
>just to annoy Bill.
What canned rebuttal? Derek never even prepared a canned rebuttal.
He just posts copies of old posts. Like the post from JMarti that
concludes no way could Derek have a PhD. And, he posts copies
of emails from customers that said they bought BC3K in a beta
state. Derek doesn't try to rebut or explain with his canned
posts. All he's apparantly trying to do is punish this ng with
spam and trying to obfuscate the issues. If you can come up
with any other explanation for Derek putting about 755 lines worth
of email talking about BC3K in a beta state in what you call his
canned rebuttal, I'd be interested in hearing it.
Jimmy Chan
Brian Bax (bm...@taurus.oac.uci.edu) wrote:
:# As with promoting his game before it was released and not warning
:#the public, then I have a game for you, it's called Ultima Online ;).
Difference is that it actually works, it doesn't work as well as some
people would like and there are many problems with it still but it worked
the first day while DS's game didn't. Another big difference is I don't
see Ultima developer's coming in the newsgroup swearing at anyone that has
anything bad to say about the game nor do I see the Ultima developer's
coming in these newsgroup claiming a false PhD.
:#But seriously, Derek can be a liar, as you cliam, he can be a scam artist,
:#as you claim, he can also have a PhD and be all three.
Or he can be a liar, a scam artist and not have a PhD.
:#They're not mutually exclusive, however you want to twist it.
Never said they were exclusive. I believe he is a liar, a scam artist and
doesn't have a PhD. Where have I said they were exclusive, or where have I
assumed that. It seems to me that you think they are exclusive but I
believe they are all of the same scheme.
:#You assume that you're first premise of lying totally excludes him from
:#ever getting an advanced degree. You're wrong. You may not want to
:#admit it, but it's true.
In a court of law, if you are caught in a lie once everything you've said
has lost all creditability. DS has lied, so why should I trust his word
that he has a PhD? You're willing to believe a liar when he tells you he
has a PhD with no supporting evidence and you want me to treat him the same
way?? Get a grip.
:#Besides Jimmy, would a scam artist put all of his work to patch a game
:#that didn't work?
Yes, a scam artist would because his creditability is at a low point due to
his lies and scams. Most if not all publishing firms wouldn't care to work
with DS right now because of the fiasco with Take2 and BC3K. The only way
for him to regain some creditability is to actually patch the game to a
working state. I've stated this before.
If DS does have a current publisher for his game, I'm thinking that one of
the conditions may be that he has to remove any claims to a PhD if he can't
prove it or is unwilling to provide proof. That seems like a probable
cause to why DS has now decided to remove his .sig.
:# I think you give the person some credit.
Credit is earned, not just given. I would have given DS credit if he had
behaved in a civil and professional manner, he didn't so why should he
receive credit? Same with respect, DS tried to gain respect with a fake
PhD, some bought into the lie, others didn't and so he has lost all
creditability and respectability. He may, in the future, regain some
credit and respect but that depends on his behavior in these newsgroups.
--
==============================ji...@hawaii.edu===============================