Martin Stower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jon Ellison Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Martin Stower Wrote:
> >
> > > I’ve met too many dimwitted graduates and
> > > admired too many people who did not take the
> route
> > > of higher education to so much as dream of
> looking
> > > down on someone for not having a degree. I
> regard
> > > anyone who does as an ignorant bigot.
> > >
> > > Merely more of your stupid, ignorant bile and
> not
> > > worth my further attention.
> > >
> > > M.
> >
> > I doubt that anyone on here looks down or up to
> > anyone having or not having a degree.
>
> Then you’ve not been reading your clique buddy
> Audrey’s posts very carefully.
>
> There’s also her weird bigoted stereotype of
> people who happen to work in IT to consider.
>
> > That's not the issue.
> > Although the integrity of my degrees have been
> > brought into question on a number of occasions.
>
> Really? Where?
>
> > The issue is those that pretend or imply that
> they
> > hold a degree when in fact they do not.
> > Those that are colloquially referred to as
> > "WALTS"
> > Walter Mittey the great pretender.
>
> That’s
> Wa
> lter Mitty, John. The original character
> was a dreamer, not a pretender.
>
> A
> [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_impost
> er]Walt[/url] makes false claims about military
> service, not degrees.

It's up to those of us who have completed military service to decide what is or isn't a WALT.


>
> > If one declares that one has a degree or
> doctorate
> > then there is no question that they are trying
> to
> > imply that they are degreed.
>
> What is this word you keep using?

You wouldn't have heard it.




>
> > You have stated that you hold a degree but have
> > chosen not to declare it.
>
> There is no obligation on this board to declare
> qualifications and most have chosen not to.
> It’s notably unfair to those members without
> degrees to give the impression that qualifications
> are a requirement and something they are going to
> be challenged on, when this is really irrelevant
> and inappropriate to the character of the board.
> On GHMB it should be taken as read that most or
> all members are not formally qualified in the
> topics under discussion. Who messed up this
> status quo ante? Your pal Femano, followed by
> you.
>
> > I've always found It is best to declare, open
> and
> > honest.
> > Everyone then knows exactly what they are
> > communicating with.
> > Virtually compulsory on business cards and
> > correspondence.
>
> You’re not exactly in the best position to
> preach about this, are you?

I'm in a very, very good position. I'm well degreed...
AND fully qualified to determine what is and what is not a [b]WALT[/b]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 28-Jun-16 21:23 by Jon Ellison.