Thread:Una74/@comment-71.58.210.121-20171010133156/@comment-4.30.124.170-20171103151405

Rather than these one-liners that do not say why people should not be able to vent in this way, let me take a look at the points one-by-one.

These things are worthy of venting: while an outspoken adjunct endures a difficult pregnancy, a tenured full professor repeatedly taunts and mocks her. A tenured full professor says an adjunct is stupid, bullying her or him with threatening comments, and posts a meme about their reading level. This list could go on. If someone had posted that Michael Berube had done these things when he had not, that would clearly merit removal. This is not what occurred.

Michael Berube likes to use the word “unhinged” as though it were wrong for a person to be upset when being taunted and bullied by him or another tenured full professor. When his taunting and bullying causes someone to experience grief to the point they are “unhinged,” and without a place to express themselves comfortably, they come to the venting page and vent about. Berube demonstrates the purpose of the venting page with his emphasis on this word.

When Michael Berube discusses his sockpuppetry of this page and the venting page, he does so with a necessary qualification, saying, “that is, I have never posted a comment *under an assumed name.*”  Of course not. He does it under another ostensibly unfamiliar IP address. There are links posted to people trolling Schuman as though they were not him, as well as these short blurbs that say nothing about why people shouldn’t be able to vent about Michael Berube’s behavior (really, there’s not much to say in defense that, anyway). When his sockpuppetry is as obvious as this, it doesn’t matter. If he wants to use a program to change his IP address and use it to comment several times in succession, ending the session with a signed comment, as if to say “see! I can’t be here and there! Ha ha! Gotcha!” It doesn’t change that the purpose of the venting page is venting about situations that come directly from people’s academic jobs (or lack thereof, or search, or interactions with faculty). So, keep sockpuppeting; it’s fine. But there’s no argument in the posts you enter under assumed IPs or under your own name.

The “slander” issue, like all the rest, is of Berube’s own making. He claims “don’t know” if Paterno knew in 1998. Despite all the evidence to the contrary in 2012- and all the streeeeeeeetches and linguistic loops necessary for it to be possible- you can certainly claim saying as much is not an apology for Paterno. And you may find some people, perhaps many in the State College PA area, who agree. But it doesn’t change anything. If he thinks it's slander, he slandered himself. (Convenient, too, that in 1998—or somewhere in there—he was hired to the Paterno Chair.)

But please, full tenured endowed professor Michael Berube, just express some anger toward Joe Paterno. All your work on this page may make you feel better, but it looks pathetic. Joe Paterno deserves your anger, and you should start a renewal process by resconsidering all your relations with him and what the situation has made you into—a tenured full professor who trolls and insults adjuncts. Instead of venting your anger about people who critique your internet behavior, rethink things in your life and how you interact with others.

The text from the facebook pages should be linked, but I am not sure if it can be done without making it public. Maybe it could be cut and pasted from there to a separate page. At any rate, in your remarks about Schuman, you do make an apology and say that you will not comment about her any more. And it seems you have stopped trolling her. (Thanks for that.) That’s the value of wikis. It can bring about responsibility for people like you, and, sometimes you even acknowledge it.