Now a Doctor

[Kurt]

fuckin crickets in here btw. all's quiet before the storm they say.

Oh, what is the big storm? Is it something where I have contradicted myself or is this going to some "academic scandal" or something. Because I don't want to miss it but perhaps I need to make a playbill or something.


I was thinking of something along these lines for the costume:



and this for the set.

[flipflop]

Cheers

[Kurt]

The use of DEFCON ONE will get you banned.

The BFC is Purple Alert territory.

[Fansy]

Dr. V has disappeared or at least gone silent regarding her thesis. Robert has said nothing regarding it. And that is after direct requests regarding policy and protocol from both of them in the TFHC as well as this forum.

And you mistake me for having fun. I'm serious. If you want to chat about it publicly, privately, over skype, or anywhere else I would be happy to confirm my stance to you person to person/face-to-face. I don't think you care that much, but I also don't think you are having fun either. And although you say it doesn't matter to you, it would at least benefit vlindsay to take me serious. All the board drama aside, there are professional and legal ramifications for breaking ethical rules when doing research with participants, participants who are supposed to be protected in a number of ways during and after the research process.

My interest began with the absence of the research results and lack of a link to the thesis (which Dr. V repeatedly said wasn't available), while at the same time when I located the thesis online, it clearly states (as you have seen me quote before):

3.12.6 Ethical agreement

In our discussions about researching the Black Flag Café, Kurt had two main concerns,
focused on ensuring the smooth functioning and continuity of the forum while the research
and, in particular, data collection was taking place, and avoiding any potential long-term
negative impacts on the online community. King (1996), Reid (1996) Kendall (1999) and
Walther (1999) all provided case studies in which research had caused conflict within online
communities and we discussed their findings (Kurt, personal communication, 29 August
2007). Although he has had no formal ethics training, Kurt implemented a utilitarian approach
to the research and its ethical issues similar to, but not identical with, those used in computer
studies (Johnson and Nissenbaum 1994). He assessed the ethical issues as if he “would
become one of the affected parties” (Johnson and Nissenbaum 1994, p.45). This was
particularly relevant as Kurt has been a Black Flag Café forum member since 2001 and has
also travelled to dangerous places and so his posts would be among those analysed. In
particular Kurt wished to avoid repercussions within the site about personal involvement in
the research (Walther 1999) and saw limiting the option of individual consent as a way of
controlling this. Another major concern linked tothis decision was identified by Robert Young
Pelton (personal communication, 18 June 2007) as well as Kurt; they both wanted to avoid
any possibility of forum members spoiling the continuity of the board by deleting or editing
their original posts following a research announcement.

After considering the information provided it was decided that:

* As the forum was in the public domain, and the forum owner had authorised the
research, forum members were not to be given the option of opting out of the
research or to be asked for their individual informed consent.

* The original permission from Robert Young Pelton stipulated that no real names
apart from his own must be used. The use of double pseudonyms was discussed
but it was felt that the usernames and avatars of the community were an
important part of the research and that the use of double pseudonyms would be
counter-productive to the research aims.

* Distressing and illegal activities discussed on the board would be reported to
Kurt.

* Any cyber-stalking would be reported directly to Robert Young Pelton.

* In order to provide reciprocity, a summary of the research findings would be
published on the forum for participants to download and any journal articles
would also be made available to the long-term forum members (Kurt, personal
communication, 29 August 2007). Following a conference in 2008 (Lindsay et
al.), three forum members wrote to request a copy of the presentation.

First, I would like to see where the final point has been satisfied by either vlindsay or Robert. To me, there is much evidence that it has not been properly satisfied. After that, I will start at the top and verify every single possible point of ethical contention in this list and throughout the thesis itself because now I have many doubts concerning the research process and reciprocity/protection of participants - people like me, you, and everyone else here.

[Kurt]

I remember that e-mail exchange six years ago very well. In fact I can recall it perfectly:

It went something like this:

*flashback squiggles*

Not Quite Dr. V: Kurt sure is awesome.

RYP: Kurt is awesome. That would be a good PhD thesis on the awesomeness of Kurt.

Not Quite Dr. V: I bet I can make money writing a book about how awesome he is.

RYP: Fuck you, I am gonna write a book about how awesome he is.

Not Quite Dr. V: Kurt is not the least bit "wet"

RYP: "I'd say he is the dryest motherfucker on this wet planet.

Me: "I hope that six years later, someone does not recall this conversation and hold us to a rigid interpretation like we are supposed to remember exactly what the fuck we said"

RYP: Nawwww

Not Quite Dr. V: You are awesome Kurt.

[Queen Erik]

Is this really about the Thesis or something else?

[Dr. Whoore]

Is this really about the Thesis or something else?

I think it might be about something else. But what though?

[nowonmai]

What I like about these two new posters is the join date. Now that's foresight.

Is this really about the Thesis or something else?

I think it might be about something else. But what though?

[Kurt]

What I like about these two new posters is the join date. Now that's foresight.

And when you remove the foresight, that is called circumspection.

[flipflop]

It's her again, or at least one of them is the old cunt

Cheers

[flipflop]

I'll go for Dr Hoo-er, the other is J

Cheers

[Dr. Whoore]

It's her again, or at least one of them is the old cunt

Cheers

No its not. Christ almighty, you could see a giant lake reptile up in Scotland and say "It's her, I could tell by the flippers and the snake-like neck."

I changed a spammer login in an attempt at a comedic effect to an e-mail that has been circulating.

[Dr. Whoore]

I'll go for Dr Hoo-er, the other is J

Cheers

Have they paired up again?

[nowonmai]

I'll go for Dr Hoo-er, the other is J

Cheers

I guess other way round. Men call women whores, women tend to use other terms.

Or is it a pseudogang?

Either way it diverts from fansy's purpose because it casts anyone questioning vlindsay as being a nutter and is as useful to her as Jabhat al-Nusra is to Assad.

[flipflop]

I'll go for Dr Hoo-er, the other is J

Cheers

Have they paired up again?

Forming the beast with two backs as we speak apparently, it's all over, civilisation as we know it.

Cheers