Social Harvard president, Claudine Gay resigns.

Was she even qualified for this position?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 6.5%
  • No

    Votes: 80 86.0%
  • Wood

    Votes: 7 7.5%

  • Total voters
    93
missing quotes while citing the author in the sentence isn't considered plagiarism lol

what the fuck are you talking about?

her work at worst was sloppy but at no point was she attributing other people's work to herself

Harvard president’s corrections do not address her clearest instances of plagiarism, including as a student in the 1990s​

“… However, it is unclear whether that review included Gay’s 1997 dissertation, in which she lifted one paragraph almost verbatim from a paper published in 1996 by scholars without citation and, in another instance, copied specific language without attribution.

Both offenses appear to go against Harvard’s guide on plagiarism, which clearly states, “it is considered plagiarism to draw any idea or any language from someone else without adequately crediting that source in your paper.” …

… CNN was able to verify some of the main allegations of the Free Beacon’s reporting and spoke with plagiarism experts who confirmed that Gay committed plagiarism in these instances.”

<WellThere>
 
You'll notice how none of these "Gay" apologists leapt to any "bu-bu-but!" defense of the white lady who resigned from her post at a school weeks earlier over the same thing. And make no mistake, this forced resignation had nothing to do with "plagiarism", and had everything to do with costing the University hundreds of millions of dollars in donations over that embarrassing testimony on Capitol Hill.

Harvard stood behind her for about a week. Then the money started drying up, and they needed a new angle to get rid of her. That's all this is, and the only people who can't see it, are the race obsessed morons on the left. She fucked with their money. She had to go.
 
You'll notice how none of these "Gay" apologists leapt to any "bu-bu-but!" defense of the white lady who resigned from her post at a school weeks earlier over the same thing. And make no mistake, this forced resignation had nothing to do with "plagiarism", and had everything to do with costing the University hundreds of millions of dollars in donations over that embarrassing testimony on Capitol Hill.

Harvard stood behind her for about a week. Then the money started drying up, and they needed a new angle to get rid of her. That's all this is, and the only people who can't see it, are the race obsessed morons on the left. She fucked with their money. She had to go.

She didn't even get fired. Just not the president anymore. Still a faculty member who gets paid the same salary of 900k.

Anybody who thinks this resignation is really about plagiarism is a moron. She messed with the Jewish donors - simple as that.
 
She didn't even get fired. Just not the president anymore. Still a faculty member who gets paid the same salary of 900k.
For now, anyways. I don't know if this will be enough to retain their donations. I wouldn't be surprised if there is another story in a few weeks over Harvard deciding to cut ties with her completely, after "an extensive review of Ms. Gay's past behavior"...
Anybody who thinks this resignation is really about plagiarism is a moron. She messed with the Jewish donors - simple as that.
Yup.
 
Haven’t seen any here. Are they like Candyman? If you say anti-Semite three times to the mirror then a big black man with a sickel and wearing a kaftan will appear?
No, a hasidic jew with a gold pick axe burrows a hole under you.
 

Harvard president’s corrections do not address her clearest instances of plagiarism, including as a student in the 1990s​

“… However, it is unclear whether that review included Gay’s 1997 dissertation, in which she lifted one paragraph almost verbatim from a paper published in 1996 by scholars without citation and, in another instance, copied specific language without attribution.

Both offenses appear to go against Harvard’s guide on plagiarism, which clearly states, “it is considered plagiarism to draw any idea or any language from someone else without adequately crediting that source in your paper.” …

… CNN was able to verify some of the main allegations of the Free Beacon’s reporting and spoke with plagiarism experts who confirmed that Gay committed plagiarism in these instances.”

<WellThere>

And with that, @tastaylvr was never seen again.
 
Funny how they are blaming racism for costing her the job when it was racism that GOT her the job.

For me, the best part of this whole situation was the exposure of the far left bias in campus.

When we’ve all seen them censure and ban conservative viewpoints for a long time now. To the point that students with conservative views are discouraged and even afraid to say anything due to the potential consequence… especially with the psycho far left professors

Then the gall of these presidents to claim they’re all about Free Speech and Palestinian supporters can chant and threaten all they want as long as they don’t actually act on it

Fuck em
 
She didn't even get fired. Just not the president anymore. Still a faculty member who gets paid the same salary of 900k.

Anybody who thinks this resignation is really about plagiarism is a moron. She messed with the Jewish donors - simple as that.

She's black, she's a woman, and she's liberal.

Lots of people wanted her gone from a number of different angles.

Anyone with an IQ above potato knows she isn't anti Semitic. Her answer was bad because she gave nuance where total capitulation was the requirement, she should have first and foremost made it clear that there are standards that are absolutely applied where violence is applied.
 
Funny how they are blaming racism for costing her the job when it was racism that GOT her the job.

She's right and no it wasn't.

Her professional success along the way and accomplishments in her brief tenure at Harvard demonstrated how qualified she was.
 
She's right and no it wasn't.

Her professional success along the way and accomplishments in her brief tenure at Harvard demonstrated how qualified she was.

Al that she had to do was answer a simple Yes or No question and she couldn't even do that.
 
She's black, she's a woman, and she's liberal.

Lots of people wanted her gone from a number of different angles.

Anyone with an IQ above potato knows she isn't anti Semitic. Her answer was bad because she gave nuance where total capitulation was the requirement, she should have first and foremost made it clear that there are standards that are absolutely applied where violence is applied.

She didn't get fired because she's a black woman. That's probably the reason she got hired.

And I don't believe she is anti-semitic, but a lot of people perceive her to be so. It's just really bad PR - thus she has to go.
 
Last edited:
She didn't get fired because she's a black woman. That's probably the reason she got hired.

And I don't believe she is anti-semitic, but a lot of people perceive her to be so. It's just really bad PR - thus she has to go.

The only reason she was let go was a good one, the plagiarism. They had to dig back decades to make the case but they did and struck gold, so she had to leave her position.

The person who drove the investigation only did so because she's black, That's racism.

And she's absolutely not anti Semitic. Her answer didn't suggest she is, and her history proves she isn't.

Suggesting she only got hired because she's black sounds pretty racist, and it's exactly what they want. Any black person in authority will be called a DEI and challenged, as if black people can't be qualified.
 
Back
Top