Mark Grant summarized the situation correctly.
Southern Illinois University pronounced Glenn Kimball's Ph.D. as being fully earned and never retracted that pronouncement. But the actual sheepskin was never formally handed to him ('awarded') at a matriculation event due to faculty infighting that flared at a later point. To many, this would have been a distinction without a difference
Glenn trustingly accepted SIU's written statement and initially began listing the earned/approved degree on his resumé. Students at three different accredited universities that I've attended did the same thing. They revised/updated their CV's for job-hunting -- claiming doctoral degrees that had been earned/approved prior to their formally 'receiving' a piece of parchment in a later graduation ceremony that most of them in fact chose to skip.
But Glenn became a casualty of faculty infighting, and his situation changed as a result. He had taken SIU at its word based on their clearly confirmed decision. Once he was made aware that the school had 'moved the goalposts long after his score', he revised his resumé and public self-description without ever excoriating the university. He was a man of great personal integrity and was absolutely mortified about the implications of SIU's changing whims. And he did his best to be clear and honest given what he knew at every point in time.
Kristin, you have misread greatly if you think I wrote that Glenn should be excused for fraud because he was a committed single parent. I have never expressed that about him or anyone else. (Indeed, I perceive no fraud in his educational background as he summarized it at different points in time.) Yet such an off-base assertion would follow in the GHMB tradition of inferring something different from what a poster actually says and then reacting to the misattribution.
And while Glenn (like most humans) made mistakes and learned from them (unlike many), he was courageously openminded and honest. Besides...if you had told someone years ago that you were married and later began saying after a subsequent divorce that you were single, would this be lying? Or if you claimed to be single, but later became married, would your intermittent self-descriptions be untruthful?
No, of course not. And do you find it curious that no one has bothered to read Glenn's work -- intend focussing on typo's, degree issues, and tangential matters?
And, please Kristin, please be specific about which fallacy of relevance you think I've fallen prey to. There are about 10 different ones depending upon how you count. All I've done is provide factual background that seems to have been understood clearly by only one poster.
Sometimes I wonder whether this site is best suited for those who wish to argue. My aim is generally to learn, and I feel like a fish out of water at times.