Setting context: On this same day, Derek posted an email that he 
had sent to Ed Bain and in part he said,
"Unfortunately for me, and I'm trusting you with this, it is one of
the degree mills (note the difference) listed in Dr Bear's book.
*sigh*".

For a complete copy of the huge post go to this same directory 
and reference the file named EmailEtAlPosted.txt.

From: dsmart@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
Subject: Re: My email from Derek Smart (9/3/99)
Date: 10 Sep 1999 00:00:00 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.space-sim,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,alt.games.bc3000ad,alt.education.distance

On 10 Sep 1999 20:13:41 GMT, mark edward hardwidge
<hardwidg@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu> wrote:

>In comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic Ed Bain <email@bottom.com> wrote:
>> No more "plausible denial", Derek.
>
>	The problem with posting email is that it's not 'proof' of
>anything.  There is no verification possible of a bunch of ASCII text.
>	I don't have any particular opinions about the whole PhD
>matter, but I think you should be aware that anyone who doesn't
>believe you isn't going to believe your attributions regarding what
>someone else said.  Anyone who already believes you will...but there
>isn't much point in convincing them!

Frankly, I don't know what the fuss is about. Like I said in email, I
have nothing to hide. Dr Bear (or was it one of the other folks from
a.e.d ?)  made it quite clear that any institution offering a degree
that is not accredited, is a degree mill. They have also indicated, as
I mentioned in my mail, that I don't *have* to answer *any* questions
from anyone, nor do I need to engage in this crap. It was in plain
sight and that is one of the reasons, as I stated, that I just decided
to declare that it was not accredited. I used Dr Bear's authoritative
guideline. End of story. As I indicated in the mail, unlike sending
money for a degree in return, I *did* the work. Now, this can be
regarded as yet another 'revelation'. Its not, nor does it even shed
any light to anything.

So much for trusting someone with confidential email. *sigh*. I guess
now we can all question the credibility of the people who contact us
via email, calling themselves lurkers, concerned few, just interested
etc. If you all remember my post about Allan of this morning, *thats*
what I'm talking about. I guess you can now all understand why this
recent turn of events with Ed, has been, well, disturbing.

So, you folks can, once again, continue to have your fun at my
expense. It doesn't change a *thing*.

The only breather has been this post, form another game developer,
which I replied to earlier and which, after my own thoughts, edited my
sig.

================
Derek,

his point is that when people, such as myself, who spent 4 1/2 years
working on  PhD at an accredited university, watch you just append a
clearly unearned title at the end of your name, it makes them angry
and it makes you look foolish.

For what it's worth, I think you are a talented game developer and you
shouldn't need to claim a degree you haven not earned (and don't
possess) in order to gain respect.  You clearly have what it takes to
earn a PhD, (intelligence, perserverence, motivation...) however, you
are simply unwilling to incur 4 years of the opportunity cost of
working toward said degree.

I don't blame you in that regard, sometimes I look at how much money I
lost in potential salary during those 4 years and kick myself.  But
one thing is for certain, only those who have actually been through an
accredited program deserve to be called Dr.

Now do the right thing and remove that PhD from your sig until you
have one from an accredited university.

Douglas Hendrix
Stardock Systems

PhD '96
Astrophysics/Plasma Physics
University of California, Irvine
======================

MY REPLY:

What a refreshing break. I accept and respect your opinion Douglas and
will continue to ponder my next move going forward. That said..

However, though it is a non-accredited degree, let me ask you this,
how does it make the work that I put it into it, less that what you
put into yours from a class room. This is the concept that I simply
*cannot* wrap my brain around. After all, that is what a DL institute
is for and several have non-accredited programs which *are* accepted
the world over and even by most top level employers. Dr Bear's book,
the most complete and excellent resource, proves that much.

Further, with the advent of the digital age and notwithstanding the
stigma associated with fraudulent operations handing out diplomas for
a fee, what is the recourse? Are we to embrace the Internet and the
ease it brings into most of our online activities which discarding the
very notion of promotion further education? Are we then to assume that
the future of education will be remain archaic simply because one has
to be in a physical classroom in order to be considered having worked.

Further along, I know how the CS degree program works, on and off
campus. It it not Biology or Chemistry, which require a certain amount
of lab work that we are talking about here. We are talking about a
field that, if you look at the sylabus from most schools, it will be
obvious that need not step a foot into a class room. Also, it is about
discipline. Sure, studying from home breeds the need to cheat but
being in the classroom does not alleviate that either. If there was an
exam that I had to take, similar to GSAT or something, that would
acknowledge my hard work, I would take it in a heart beat and would
have nary a doubt in my mind that I would pass with flying colors.

For the same reason I did the degree through DL, I could not afford
the work downtime because I had a good career, safe life and I just
did not want to disrupt that. I didn't do it in order to get a job (I
haven't worked for anyone in almost 10 years and until '95, I was
still a consultant to computer corps), I did it because, simply, I
felt like it. It was about prestige and ego I guess. It wasn't about
sibling rivalry either. Also, the institute allowed me privacy, ease
of studies and I didn't have to make my technology public. My whole
work that I currently do, as you know, centers around *very* advanced
AI technology I created from the ground up and I am extremely
protective of it because it gives me the edge.  In fact, the other day
I was on the phone with the counselor of a local college that offers
Ph.D degrees in CS (you probably read the other threads in which some
people suggested various colleges and I have been looking into one
with an accredited program) and I asked the same thing. She told me
*point blank* that I would be better off *not* doing the degree
because I'd have to list my dissertation unless is was a matter of
national security or some crap to that effect. So, if I do enrol, I'd
have to do a dissertation on something *completely* different and
which I wouldn't care if it was listed or not. It would be like
starting from scratch. Apart from that, I don't think doing a thesis
on the hazards of game development, is going to fly. Do you? :)
I am open to suggestions in this regard because I have *full*
intentions of enrolling in an accredited program for my own personal
advancement and nothing else.

Further along, how about those institutions that give our honorary
degrees to folks who *never* even either went to school there or
stepped foot in a degree program. What about them? At least I did the
work, accredited or not. In fact, I plan on contacting Princeton
University (cause I have a contact there) to see if I could get into a
program or some sort of recognition if they found my technology in my
dissertation, worthy. Naturally, I don't particularly plan on upping
and moving to NJ (though I have a pad in NYC) even if they did let me
enrol, but, I'm sure I could get some good suggestions on how to
proceed, before I enrol in a local school here in Fort Lauderdale.

Believe me, I am not doing this to piss people off, it just seems that
way. Many years ago, how was I to know that this whole thing would
come to this? Talk about hindsight. This is why I maintain that once
it got out of hand, there was no turning back and yes, I regret saying
that it was accredited when it wasn't but I did that for a specific
reason, as I have already stated.

I am torn in what to do and not do, further, I have a lawsuit pending
because Huffman *refuses* to back the hell off me. Apart from that,
removing the Ph.D. from my sig is one thing, feeling good about it is
another. Besides, it would just be one more thing to attack me for and
the detractors would have a field day. Case in point: yesterday, I was
moving my Euroda mailbox around and forgot to update Agent for my sig
file. Before you know it, one of them, Daktari (man of many aliases),
was quick to stab at me for it. No doubt you saw the post in this same
thread? Now *thats* what I'm talking about. I also need justification
(as you aptly put it that anyone not of an accredited program, should
not be refered to as Dr.) for removing those initials because right
now, I just *don't* see anything other than people's isolated
opinions. Besides, people rarely call me Dr. and in fact, my employees
could care less and lets not even talk about the fan base.

This is not an issue that has to be polled. All around us there are
people in high places who end up in the same predicament. Saw
somethingon Wired earlier this week, saw something in the NYT awhile
back etc. But I *did* the work. In fact, I just saw something in the
Monday edition of The Herald (www.broward.com) in which a bunch of
students where suing a local college because they failed to tell said
students that their physical fitness program lost its degree program
accreditation! Imagine that.

I don't know what to do but perhaps with the proper debate and
dialogue, I will find a solution. It all boils down to public opinion
and I think the world knows how I feel about that. I plan on
contacting Dr Bear privately for advice and go from there. Eitherway,
I will do whats best for *me* and whats *right*; and *not* whats best
based on public opinion. I don't strive on public opinion and I can be
a jackass all day about it and it won't change people's opinion of me.
I will always, Ph.D. or not, be me, Derek Smart.

Thanks for your opinion. See what happens when people are reasonable?
Some, Ph.D. or not, just feel like they can attack someone and have a
teddy bear thrown back at them. Fuck 'um, Ph.D and all.

=====================

DOUGS REPLY:

One problem with this is that I gave up 4 years of a career to earn a
PhD. My salary in 1995 was 1/6 of what I make now.  Because of this,
most PhDs feel like you gotta pay your dues similarly if you want to
be called Dr.
Not to mention that if it worked the way you are saying, then
everybody with 5 years of work experience in some industry should
automatically be awarded a PhD.  My boss is a great example, he has a
MS Physics and 20 years of Aerospace industry experience, but he made
his choice not to pursue a PhD and instead get a job and so he is not
a Dr., but I, his subordinate, am.

Another problem with this is that I spent 2 of those years travelling
the world presenting my work in front of the worlds experts and
defending it against their criticisms.  I published 4 papers in
Astrophysics Journals and defended my work formally against criticism
from referees.  The result is something you just can't achieve via a
non-accredited school.  The quality of a dissertation accepted by an
accredited school is something you can't match with DL.

> Further, with the advent of the digital age and notwithstanding the
> stigma associated with fraudulent operations handing out diplomas for
> a fee, what is the recourse? Are we to embrace the Internet and the
> ease it brings into most of our online activities which discarding the
> very notion of promotion further education? Are we then to assume that
> the future of education will be remain archaic simply because one has
> to be in a physical classroom in order to be considered having worked.

I have no qualms with remote research.  Toward the end of my grad
studies, I worked mostly alone in my offfice or at home.  In the
beginning, however, I really knew nothing about the subject matter of
my research and needed the pointers from my advisor to make sure I was
going in the right direction. This is most likely the reason for
residency requirements.  It's the kind of thing that you have to have
been there to realize how much you grow as a scholar and a scientist
by going through an accredited PhD program and having an advisor who
is a world expert in a field.

> Further along, I know how the CS degree program works, on and off
> campus. It it not Biology or Chemistry, which require a certain amount
> of lab work that we are talking about here. We are talking about a
> field that, if you look at the sylabus from most schools, it will be
> obvious that need not step a foot into a class room. Also, it is about
> discipline. Sure, studying from home breeds the need to cheat but
> being in the classroom does not alleviate that either. If there was an
> exam that I had to take, similar to GSAT or something, that would
> acknowledge my hard work, I would take it in a heart beat and would
> have nary a doubt in my mind that I would pass with flying colors.

I  agree here.  Though, for example, my research was purely
theoretical, so I had no real requirements to be on campus other than
what I mentioned above.  In the field of neural networks, there is
also a lot of heady theory. I would imagine that studying under the
tutelage of an academic expert would really be necessary to fully
understand the current state of ther art and to be able to formulate
ground breaking research.  BTW, there is a professor at UC
Irvine in the Physics Dept. doing research in neural nets.

> For the same reason I did the degree through DL, I could not afford
> the work downtime because I had a good career, safe life and I just
> did not want to disrupt that. I didn't do it in order to get a job (I
> haven't worked for anyone in almost 10 years and until '95, I was
> still a consultant to computer corps), I did it because, simply, I
> felt like it. It was about prestige and ego I guess. It wasn't about
> sibling rivalry either. Also, the institute allowed me privacy, ease
> of studies and I didn't have to make my technology public. My whole
> work that I currently do, as you know, centers around *very* advanced
> AI technology I created from the ground up and I am extremely
> protective of it because it gives me the edge.  In fact, the other day
> I was on the phone with the counselor of a local college that offers
> Ph.D degrees in CS (you probably read the other threads in which some
> people suggested various colleges and I have been looking into one
> with an accredited program) and I asked the same thing. She told me
> *point blank* that I would be better off *not* doing the degree
> because I'd have to list my dissertation unless is was a matter of
> national security or some crap to that effect. So, if I do enrol, I'd
> have to do a dissertation on something *completely* different and
> which I wouldn't care if it was listed or not. It would be like
> starting from scratch. Apart from that, I don't think doing a thesis
> on the hazards of game development, is going to fly. Do you? :)
> I am open to suggestions in this regard because I have *full*
> intentions of enrolling in an accredited program for my own personal
> advancement and nothing else.

I feel your pain here.  I know plenty of people who could have
completed PhDs.  Some started and had to quit to get a job to support
family.  Some never started because they had to feed hungry mouths.
That's a choice you have to make.  My recommendation to you is if you
have enough money, go ahead and enroll in a an accredited program and
split your time between game develpment and a PhD.

I started my game, Stellar Frontier, just before I started writing my
dissertation. I was able to do both quite easily.  Stellar Frontier
was my break from working on research and research was my break from
working on Stellar Frontier. I also know how it is to work on a game
for many years. (4 and counting).  At times it is like having a 100lb
necklace.

> Further along, how about those institutions that give our honorary
> degrees to folks who *never* even either went to school there or
> stepped foot in a degree program. What about them? At least I did the
> work, accredited or not. In fact, I plan on contacting Princeton
> University (cause I have a contact there) to see if I could get into a
> program or some sort of recognition if they found my technology in my
> dissertation, worthy. Naturally, I don't particularly plan on upping
> and moving to NJ (though I have a pad in NYC) even if they did let me
> enrol, but, I'm sure I could get some good suggestions on how to
> proceed, before I enrol in a local school here in Fort Lauderdale.

I always wondered about those honorary degrees.  I know Bill Cosby
has one, though I'm sure he doesn't call himself a Dr.

> Believe me, I am not doing this to piss people off, it just seems that
> way. Many years ago, how was I to know that this whole thing would
> come to this? Talk about hindsight. This is why I maintain that once
> it got out of hand, there was no turning back and yes, I regret saying
> that it was accredited when it wasn't but I did that for a specific
> reason, as I have already stated.
>
> I am torn in what to do and not do, further, I have a lawsuit pending
> because Huffman *refuses* to back the hell off me. Apart from that,
> removing the Ph.D. from my sig is one thing, feeling good about it is
> another. Besides, it would just be one more thing to attack me for and
> the detractors would have a field day. Case in point: yesterday, I was
> moving my Euroda mailbox around and forgot to update Agent for my sig
> file. Before you know it, one of them, Daktari (man of many aliases),
> was quick to stab at me for it. No doubt you saw the post in this same
> thread? Now *thats* what I'm talking about. I also need justification
> (as you aptly put it that anyone not of an accredited program, should
> not be refered to as Dr.) for removing those initials because right
> now, I just *don't* see anything other than people's isolated
> opinions. Besides, people rarely call me Dr. and in fact, my employees
> could care less and lets not even talk about the fan base.

Yeah, I don't know what to do about that.  Seems like you're damned if
you do and damned if you don't.

> This is not an issue that has to be polled. All around us there are
> people in high places who end up in the same predicament. Saw
> somethingon Wired earlier this week, saw something in the NYT awhile
> back etc. But I *did* the work. In fact, I just saw something in the
> Monday edition of The Herald (www.broward.com) in which a bunch of
> students where suing a local college because they failed to tell said
> students that their physical fitness program lost its degree program
> accreditation! Imagine that.
>
> I don't know what to do but perhaps with the proper debate and
> dialogue, I will find a solution. It all boils down to public opinion
> and I think the world knows how I feel about that. I plan on
> contacting Dr Bear privately for advice and go from there. Eitherway,
> I will do whats best for *me* and whats *right*; and *not* whats best
> based on public opinion. I don't strive on public opinion and I can be
> a jackass all day about it and it won't change people's opinion of me.
> I will always, Ph.D. or not, be me, Derek Smart.

I agree.  I think the best thing you could do would be to earn an
accredited PhD.

BTW,

I'll trade you a copy of Stellar Frontier for BC3000.  Right now
during beta it's a free download at
======================


Derek Smart, PhD (non-accredited)
Designer/Lead Developer
The Battlecruiser Series
www.bc3000ad.com

"The man who follows the crowd will usually get no further 
than the crowd.  The man who walks alone is likely to find 
himself in places no one has ever been. Someone lemme out!"