You got some 'splaining to do Lucy..... - Page 3 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Male30Dan · 03-17-2007, 12:11 AM

Rylan, we get it... You don't like the guy and you don't believe him.

Personally I don't care but I will say it is a lot to buy into. I take him for his word as he has never lied to me and really has no reason to lie now. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't, but what will he gain by telling this story if he is lying? Surely he is intelligent enough to know many would doubt him and flame him for it so I dunno, I guess I will just say that I will believe him innocent until proven guilty.

FINtastic · 03-17-2007, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

As long as we're confessing, it's only right that I come clean. Yes, I'm one of the grad students.

Dang, chum beat me to the punch. I was gonna throw out the wild conspiracy that he was in on this all along.

Rhylan · 03-17-2007, 12:56 AM

To the contrary Dan.. I quite like Doc, especially before he got way too over the top with individual feuds the last couple of years. I'm just a pragmatist.. surprised that anyone is willing to take it at face value.

dude1394 · 03-17-2007, 01:02 AM

I always' like doc(s). But I must admit there has been a breach of trust and it will forever be a question about whether i'm talking to a person or if I'm being inspected. Shame actually.

After thinking it was the wildest thing I've ever heard, I now also can't quite take doc seriously on...well..anything.

Rhylan · 03-17-2007, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

I always' like doc(s). But I must admit there has been a breach of trust and it will forever be a question about whether i'm talking to a person or if I'm being inspected. Shame actually.

And this is exactly my point. The Doc I know - and the Doc I've met in person - enjoyed the forum too much to ever let people jack with his account, or to threaten the contributions he'd made. He'd never stand for it. Very early on, he was on the road to having the highest post count and whatnot. He was always all about making acquaintences and talking sports and whatever else.

He's had a steady rate of activity on the board since his first day here, over 5 years ago - which doesn't really support the idea that somewhere around post 25,000, one person was supplanted by a group of people who were able to perfectly coordinate their behaviors to imitate a guy who was already ALL over the board and had common memories and experiences with tons of other members.

Mavs Rule · 03-17-2007, 01:28 AM

All the world's a stage .... it is all a farce, a con, an illusion, a dream! Lets roll with it or leave it!

nashtymavsfan13 · 03-17-2007, 01:35 AM

I don't know what to believe, I've always liked Doc, but this just sounds so crazy.

rabbitproof · 03-17-2007, 02:29 AM

could be true. could be not true.

what it is is seriously. up.

OzMavs · 03-17-2007, 03:13 AM

Weird. You build up a mental picture of the people who post here and you rely on your feelings and the information provided, but its the internet, those of us who haven't met Doc in person aren't supposed to feel cheated. Imagine trying to explain this story to your grandparents:
"Well, there's this guy on the internet that has posted over 40,000 times and somebody else entered into a social study on provocation under his respected screen name, tarnishing his reputation and offending other posters."

I bet they drop dead with laughter.

My head hurts with the possibilities of who I am chatting with and making friends with on the net. But Doc seems on the most part to me to be a genuine guy. I just hope I'm speaking about the right one.

Dirkadirkastan · 03-17-2007, 04:25 AM

Rhylan, you obviously didn't understand me. All I was saying is you can make a consistent argument between what he's saying now and how he was acting before. I never said I believed him, I said I didn't care.

Dan, either he lied to you before or he's lying to you now. There's no way around it.

Fin, you know Chum is embarrassed.

dude1394 · 03-17-2007, 08:24 AM

Even on the internet having a very long term conversation with an anonymous person builds a relationship, virtual but it's not much less real than could be had by using the phone everyday...except that you would have assurances that it was the same person.

Even if the person you are posting with isn't who they pretend to be, they are still the same person. This other thing is little more than fraud that will be difficult to overlook.

And for all of the folks (me included) who hoped that doc would come back to our little community will forever be disappointed, because that person just doesn't exist. Maybe it's better that he not come back at all as it will be pretty tough to do much more than roll the eyes if anything of substance tries to come out of that username.

mary · 03-17-2007, 09:14 AM

Well, since this is public domain, I think it would be a bit unfair if this thread didn't preserve the orginal message for all to read, study, and speculate about. Seriously, if I don't get to give consent to have my thoughts studied, then I don't see why we should afford that luxury to anyone else.

So for anyone that's been under a rock this week, here it is, in all its glory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drbio

Greetings friends. It’s actually been a while since I have been on the site and that is not because of the recent banning for a month. I was pretty regularly absent long before that. This is going to be a long explanation for those interested in reading it but hopefully it will be worth the time and clear some things up.

I was recently at a conference and when I came back I was looking forward to coming to the site and participate in a GDT. One problem. My account had been banned. Over the past month I have been reading through numerous posts and more recently I have reviewed the private messages sent and received from/to my account. I also had to change my password post-ban. Perhaps the following will clear some things up.

About three years ago, I was involved in a planning discussion for a graduate student thesis as an outside reader. Most universities require an outside reader for the purpose of maintaining graduate school rules and representation, fair handling of the established protocols for graduation etc. It eliminates the appearance and possibility of a major advisor “pushing through” a graduate who was not deserving of a degree just to get them the heck out of their environment. Trust me….it has happened at darned near every school at some point. Anyways, the thesis planning group was convened and I was the reader.

A student had put together a proposal for a masters thesis of study in social theory and specifically wanted to study community theory. The original proposal was interesting but quite frankly not very well developed….especially to those in the know in that field (not my area of expertise at all so I had to take their word for it). The committee sent the kid back out with some very direct questions and requirements and asked that student to develop an original idea couched within the known and accepted theoretical standards of their chosen topic, i.e. Community Theory.

Soonafter, the student requested that we meet again. To be honest, I did not expect much. However, the kid came through. They had obviously studied up very diligently on the theoretical concepts and had to the surprise of the committee applied it to a new and original area of study. The student chose to study applied community theory in the online environment. There was a lot of committee discussion. A whole lot. I’d like to think that my participation assuaged at least one objector as I described my involvement of online community at D-M.com and two other sites, one which I had been a member since 1999 and another since 2000. More discussion ensued. A lot of it. Then some more. The kid had well thought out answers for almost every committee inquiry. I learned a lot about social and community theory during the process. Certainly more than I ever thought or ever wanted but it was interesting.

I had intended on sharing the students questions of study and many of the results but I spoke to another committee member and they were reluctant to release much information which might identify the primary student. Why would I speak to another committee member about this? Easy. And the answer may give you some insight into the oddities of my account over the past couple years. Stay with me…I’ll eventually get there.

The committee approved a path of study for this student and they established several accounts in potential online communities. Several undergraduates and a couple of graduate students were used to post about topics relating to the research questions in online communities focused on politics, religion (a lot of this type of site), medical issues, cars, shopping, higher education, and of course sports. I probably have forgotten some but you get the idea. I volunteered my D-M.com account and two others way back at the start of this study because I identified them as established online communities and I believed in what this student was trying to accomplish.

Interactions between posters were noted, behavioral and interactive responses were noted, reactions to political questions, crime, topics of the day, etc were all noted. Trends in theory and question were examined. The one idea that I will share is that the researchers were looking for similarities between real communities and how they react and online communities. Pretty interesting topic to the kids and committee.

So, now you are aware that other people posted on my account over the past couple of years (one graduate student and a few undergraduate data collectors, one of which parlayed their time into another masters thesis separate from this one but that is another story). I divulged this to one mod and a couple of you over the past year and a half or so when questions arose over odd posts, inconsistent behavior etc. I was reluctant to share this and appreciate those of you who knew this keeping it quiet to preserve the integrity of the research project. It was recently that I began to talk to the data collectors about their role in this project and their temperament on the sites of study. The committee is aware of these discussions and quite frankly at least one kid was fired from this research grant as a result of the recent garbage that was posted which was clearly beyond the scope of the approved study.

You may be thinking something along the lines of “was any of my stuff used”? I don't know. Probably? Maybe? This may piss some people off. If so I apologize as that was never an intended consequence. However, I thought the pursuit of intellectual discovery was certainly worth it and to be fair, everything posted in a forum is in the public domain and free for consumption and use….and yes, the IRB and GC seemed to agree on that way back when this kicked off. You can rest assured that gameday threads and the like were not a large part of this study for several reasons (i.e. typically no questions were relevant and most of us were rabid Mavs homers). Some GDT stuff was used to note how sports communities banded together etc versus other team fans but most was minor. You can also rest assured that NONE of the private messages that you may have sent were used, although unfortunately I have discovered that several PM’s were sent out that I was not aware of and that was unacceptable. Prior to initiating this study, a set of fairly well thought out ground rules were put in place. Several of those ground rules have been broken, especially in the past year. The one point recently about a bazillion pm's being sent from my account however is not substantiated. Quite frankly I find no evidence of it (only 4 sent pm's to the poster in question and those were in response to sick dialogue for which both people should be ashamed).

The good news in all of this is that a student earned a masters degree and has been accepted into a doctoral program to expand on their work. Equally positive is the fact that another student is working in theoretical community theory towards their own masters degree. Not to be overlooked is the value of exposing other undergrads to research methodologies.

The bad stuff is unfortunately being dealt with. As the owner of this account, I do apologize to those who were subjected to one of our undergrad data collectors and ultimately take responsibility for the use of the Drbio account. This individual was removed from the project and taken through internal processes. They were lucky to remain in school. Damned lucky. Real damn lucky. I and another recommended against it and they are lucky an impartial person reviewed their actions. This site was not even the most egregious of behavioral problems, probably due to my continued participation in the occasional GDT. The actions of two posters on multiple sites nearly derailed a very interesting and academically valuable line of research and that is totally unacceptable, as is the way that some have been treated on multiple sites.

I have tried to read up on the posts made here and at other sites but I will restrict my further talk on this subject to only that stuff posted here. I have literally poured over page after page after page after page of post documentation and analysis, theoretical interpretations, etc for posts made here. Another committee member and I continue to inspect use logs, site data etc to provide insight into some recent problems. However...we are at the end as neither os f have the time nor the inclination to continue.

One such incident is the recent chumdawg stuff. Chum and I always got along fine and the mutual awarding of this sites reputation supports that. I have looked at the pm’s and I do not know what happened because there are literally no outgoing pm’s on my account to chum outside of three individual pm’s which involve a bit of a pissing match on both sides. So chum….I don’t know what to say about the bazillion pm’s as I find no evidence of it. I do apologize for allowing my account to be used in such a manner if it was. I have changed the account password and hope that we can interact like we have been in the past from this point on, but seriously…there is nothing for me to go on here. If you have something I would be interested in seeing it.

The stuff at the other sites quite frankly make this stuff here look like nothing. I am happy to field questions, inquiries etc from any of you and it will probably help us in determining one other fate. Perhaps pm's would be best for individual inquiry? I actually would appreciate the feedback. I’ll tell you if I personally argued with you or not (mavdog) and tell you if I need to hear more to know. It would be helpful. Anyways…rather than try to list any findings from here I am going to offer the Q&A and hope it also helps us.

I would like to keep this account open for at least this Q&A process but if it needs to be permanently banned…do it. It matters not to me. If it can stay open great. I have changed the password (about a week ago) and no further accessibility will ever be made but me and me only. Quite frankly, my time here has been sporadic at best over the past year and I can start over if need be or if time permits.

Here’s hoping this clears up at least some things.

Thanks again to those of you helped keep this project on path. Your ability to keep a secret was much appreciated.

Best regards…

Doc

Male30Dan · 03-17-2007, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

Rhylan, you obviously didn't understand me. All I was saying is you can make a consistent argument between what he's saying now and how he was acting before. I never said I believed him, I said I didn't care.

Dan, either he lied to you before or he's lying to you now. There's no way around it.

Fin, you know Chum is embarrassed.

Dirk... If by lying you mean posting as someone else in threads I don't read, (Politcal threads mainly), than sure, he lied/deceived me and others. But I really only talked to him in PMs, and he assured me that was all him. If that is true, I don't really consider him "lying" to me in any way.

dude1394 · 03-17-2007, 10:57 AM

good for you mary, I agree, can't really feel like doc(s) need their privacy respected.

Usually Lurkin · 03-17-2007, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mary

Seriously, if I don't get to give consent to have my thoughts studied, then I don't see why we should afford that luxury to anyone else.

Studying the threads and discussions at a public forum is one thing. Actively manipulating the discussions for that purpose (and without consent, no less!) is another thing entirely. Allowing the board to be manipulated by assistants without enough supervision is a crappy thing to do. And trolling is trolling is trolling. Whether its purpose is academic or personal, it is bad, and to do it in a community (or allow it to be done under your responsibility) is disrespectful to everyone.

mary · 03-17-2007, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

Studying the threads and discussions at a public forum is one thing. Actively manipulating the discussions for that purpose (and without consent, no less!) is another thing entirely. Allowing the board to be manipulated by assistants without enough supervision is a crappy thing to do. And trolling is trolling is trolling. Whether its purpose is academic or personal, it is bad, and to do it in a community (or allow it to be done under your responsibility) is disrespectful to everyone.

X

Underdog · 03-17-2007, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

Studying the threads and discussions at a public forum is one thing. Actively manipulating the discussions for that purpose (and without consent, no less!) is another thing entirely.

Haha - it's not a whole lot different than watching commercial television...

mary · 03-17-2007, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male23Dan

Dirk... If by lying you mean posting as someone else in threads I don't read, (Politcal threads mainly), than sure, he lied/deceived me and others. But I really only talked to him in PMs, and he assured me that was all him. If that is true, I don't really consider him "lying" to me in any way.

Not to pick on you Dan, but if ever a person feels the need to put quotes around the word "lying", that's a pretty good indication that "lying" is taking place somewhere. You know what I'm saying? Here's another example.

Sentence A: She's not fat.

Sentence B: She's not "fat".

See the difference?

ocelot_ark · 03-17-2007, 12:38 PM

I've always thought Doc was a douche. Still do. So this whole episode really has no effect on me.

ilMavvento · 03-17-2007, 01:28 PM

This seems like an awfully shaky line of research for a thesis. The study involved nearly every topic of discussion (politics/religion/sports etc.) ? How could meaningful conclusions be made from a place like this? The Issues forum is just an echo chamber anyway. What would be the control group? How could findings here, online, be verified by anyone? Hell, people have a hard enough time even detecting sarcasm online, much less analyzing behavior.

On the other hand, if the project was to study people's reaction to power and "authority" in an online setting, that might make some sense. A well-respected member with a million posts .... how much can he get away with and for how long? Will other posters bend to his will? How many will side with him?

How did I react to one of your team's neg rep onslaughts? Did I pass? Can I have my piece of cheese now?

chumdawg · 03-17-2007, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilMavvento

This seems like an awfully shaky line of research for a thesis. The study involved nearly every topic of discussion (politics/religion/sports etc.) ? How could meaningful conclusions be made from a place like this? The Issues forum is just an echo chamber anyway. What would be the control group? How could findings here, online, be verified by anyone? Hell, people have a hard enough time even detecting sarcasm online, much less analyzing behavior.

You have to remember, we're talking about Baylor here.

But seriously, why would a graduate student--which Doc was at the time--be sitting on a graduate advising committee anyway? That's the kookiest part of the story.

Quote:

About three years ago, I was involved in a planning discussion for a graduate student thesis as an outside reader. Most universities require an outside reader for the purpose of maintaining graduate school rules and representation, fair handling of the established protocols for graduation etc. It eliminates the appearance and possibility of a major advisor “pushing through” a graduate who was not deserving of a degree just to get them the heck out of their environment. Trust me….it has happened at darned near every school at some point. Anyways, the thesis planning group was convened and I was the reader.

aexchange · 03-17-2007, 02:08 PM

hrmm, this entire thread smells like total poop.

and the explanation is too.

mary · 03-17-2007, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aexchange

hrmm, this entire thread smells like total poop.

and the explanation is too.

I'm 80% in the poop camp.

Drbio · 03-17-2007, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhylan

And this is exactly my point. The Doc I know - and the Doc I've met in person - enjoyed the forum too much to ever let people jack with his account, or to threaten the contributions he'd made. He'd never stand for it. Very early on, he was on the road to having the highest post count and whatnot. He was always all about making acquaintences and talking sports and whatever else.

I was very interested and active until one day when a dear friend was lost and the board has never been the same to me. Rhylan continues to remain a friend and I respect him. Certainly another friend Dan is incorrect about his view of me. It's ok.

Quote:

He's had a steady rate of activity on the board since his first day here, over 5 years ago - which doesn't really support the idea that somewhere around post 25,000, one person was supplanted by a group of people who were able to perfectly coordinate their behaviors to imitate a guy who was already ALL over the board and had common memories and experiences with tons of other members.

Go back just shy of three years ago and you will see not so subtle changes in my posting habits. Several people asked me about mood swings, attitude differences. SaltwaterChaffy once posted something about me being able to go from the most compassionate person to a total ass. All that occurred in the last three years. The first year or so here the only one I would ever argue with was murphy and reeds. And I like murphy.

Regardless, believe what you wish. I am not trying to force anyone to believe anything, I was merely trying to clear the air.

UL- Fair point. I do regret not supervising things more closely. I actively engaged in several arguments myself so it would have probably been not as supervisory as expected anyways. I am not saying that I did not engage in pissing mataches at times.

OZ- as far as I know the conversations we have had have been between us.

mary- fair enough. And I am happy to have that post out there or I would not have put it up in the first place. I removed it by request.

Thanks Dan.

ilMav- the comparative analysis was between community repsonses. Did online communties respond in similar fashion to real ones. Are online communities actually communities at all?

Dude- I'm sorry you feel that way. Especially since I shared this with you back on January 13th. Maybe the biggest mistake was trying to clear the air since so many people got upset (understandably).

chum- I haven't been a grad student in a long time but grad students do regularly participate in search committees. But I would not expect you to understand that not having ever been one.

chumdawg · 03-17-2007, 02:39 PM

Two years is "a long time?"

Usually Lurkin · 03-17-2007, 02:46 PM

chum, how do you know how long since doc was a grad student

Drbio · 03-17-2007, 02:46 PM

He obviously doesn't. I think he misread something in my post. But ask him about teh Nimitz decathalon team sometime.

dude1394 · 03-17-2007, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drbio

Dude- I'm sorry you feel that way. Especially since I shared this with you back on January 13th. Maybe the biggest mistake was trying to clear the air since so many people got upset (understandably).

I'll comment on this one. I received your PM and recall the information. Quite frankly I took it as a very minor thing that consisted mostly of viewing the interworkings of the folks posting here, not actively manipulating those same posters, my mistake obviously.

Looking at the pm later I do see that you stated you only posted half of the posts that you did and as is my wont it appears I did not get down to the last sentence with the same comprehension as the first paragraph. I'll just have to claim not reading to the bottom of the PM so again my perception was that someone was using your account to read pms, etc. I'm not sure if less discussion with "you" would have occurred if I recalled that you were actually 5+ folks.

However a Jan13th "confession" doesn't really absolve why I would feel this way since we are talking about 2 months out of many years (since 2002 as it were) when I "knew" the "truth". So that means you were honest with me for 2 months out of 24, if you can be believed.

Again it is quite unfortunate. It appears I was having conversations with someone, sharing photos, pms, that was not who I thought they were all with your blessing. I wonder if you found it funny if I ever shared something personal, or possibly your buds. As I continue to think about it, I continue to feel more and more strongly that it was a shitty thing to do. You can say that it was all for science, but scientists typically have ethics as well, not sure about yours right now.

C'est la vie. Quite frankly this would come out much less egregious if you would have stopped posting on your own account totally instead of mixing yourself in on posts, using your prior knowledge of other posters to continue to fool same.

I guess the jokes just on me, and maybe kg_veteran and others as we stupidly discussed the on-going blow-up between you and chum. Or maybe kg and chum are grads students as well, who knows.

I know this sounds like a jilted lover, but violation of trust is violation of trust, no matter the situation.

chumdawg · 03-17-2007, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

chum, how do you know how long since doc was a grad student

He told us about it here, a couple years ago, when he finished his PhD in Biology.

Then again, I guess that could have been one of the other Doc's.

purplefrog · 03-17-2007, 03:00 PM

Doc-

I have had some experience with IRBs. One point that confuses me is why it was deemed appropriate to engage in manipulation (I mean this from an experimental point of view, not psychological) of the community without individual informed consent from the members. I understand that an online message board is public domain, but a manipulation of dialogue within the community would still require some form of consent, or at least a formal debriefing imo. I am only interested in this from an academic point of view because it is an issue that I find intriguing. Also, do you think the results of this work will ever be published?

I am not interested in questioning the validity of your account because I just don't see what is to be gained. It is what it is. We can do this via pms if that seems more appropriate. Thanks.

Drbio · 03-17-2007, 03:03 PM

chum- It's been a long long time, but again, I do not expect you to understand grad school or academic environments.

dude- I owe you a pm. I know that at least two still have accounts and post here. At least one of them is well known. They can tell you who they are.

purplefrog- you too.

dude1394 · 03-17-2007, 03:05 PM

don't worry about it, i probably won't believe it anyway.

chumdawg · 03-17-2007, 03:06 PM

Okay, Jess. Whatever you say.

Drbio · 03-17-2007, 03:12 PM

hahaha....a bit off there jeremy.

ocelot_ark · 03-17-2007, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drbio

chum- It's been a long long time, but again, I do not expect you to understand grad school or academic environments.

Now that's probably not the best way to go about winning people back. Perhaps you should just GTFO.

FahQ · 03-17-2007, 05:03 PM

I know I haven't posted in a while, but what a dick. And Doc and I really got along when I did post here.

Flacolaco · 03-17-2007, 05:19 PM

it's almost time to put the "dead cat" photo on this thing....

EricaLubarsky · 03-17-2007, 06:03 PM

Wait this is a biology study? The story just keeps coming more and more unwound. I dont know how anyone in their right mind could believe that a study of online-- whoknowswhat could be part of a graduate thesis in BIOLOGY.

Nemesis · 03-17-2007, 06:06 PM

so which Doc got into my head during Baylor VS A&M week? KooKoo Doc or PHD Doc?

ocelot_ark · 03-17-2007, 06:18 PM

Said doc:

hahaha....if you think I give a rip about what you think (or pretty much anyone) you would have another think coming. The account was extremely successful and that is jsutification enough. The funny part is that there are two remaining accounts here, one of which is a "regular well established" poster. Care to guess who?

As we kill this account we exit laughing.

Says me:
GTFO.