Slashdot Mirror
Professor Sues teacherreview.com Site Operator
CmdrPorno writes "ZDTV's [Cybercrime Section] reports that the fellow who created the teacherreview.com Web site is being sued by one of the professors who claims he was defamed on the site." Oh, my. Someone said something bad about someone else on the Internet? Maybe I should sue Slashdot for every AC that's said something about the quality of my writing. Seriously, take a look at this, although some of the language is questionable.
How does one learn anything from this. Simple. You read. You get a 'feel' for what the Truth is. The human brain has a fantastic enctended version of 'grep' in it, fully capable of discriminating the bogus from the real. So even though asking about frobs will collect all possible opinions, there's still a bell curve of truth you can zero in on. And you'll find your answer.
I support teacherreview.com. I'm gonna review some of my profs right now!
Just about every university has someone who rates professors. Here at MSU we have Mark Grebner who, while I don't believe has ever been sued, I know has really annoyed some professors with his ratings.
I think part of the reason he has never been sued is the sheer length of time he's been publishing them - he started in the mid 70's!
Considering the incredibly low opinion his students have of him, maybe he should listen before he opens his big mouth and digs himself into a deeper hole.
;)
But does he listen? No, he whines. Well, I guess his critics were right, then.
And he must have paid extra to that boy on Polk St., not to tell...
Oops, I defamed him in a public forum! Ban Slashdot and the Internet! It's evil! People can express their opinions without censorship! BURN ALL TEXT!!!
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
By saying that racism, sexism, etc. are all the same kind of proves the point.
What point? You don't seem to have put any points forth for that statement to prove.
So a black man's experience is the same as a white woman's? Huh? Have you gone and talked to any?
You have no idea how many I've talked to. And you're right about one thing; in the particulars they're different. But see my next statement; the specifics vary, but when all is said and done they're about the same basic thing.
But racism, sexism, and heterosexism are concepts built around the experience of not being white, male, or straight. Now it's pretty obvious to me that no amount of good intentions on your part is going to make your opinions on these matters a heck of a lot more insightful.
You speak of the effects of these things. I speak of the things themselves. And as I said, while the particulars of the effects vary (in some cases greatly), can you argue that you cannot find the things I describes in all cases: inequity, injustice, and suffering? I don't think you can.
If I got one thing from feminism, it was learning that it didn't help to have an opinion on everything, and knowing when to shut the fsck up and let somebody else have a say. Give it a try!
I'm not sure what to make of that. Frankly I've never seen a brand of feminism that ever said that, except perhaps the the very few which advocate the eradication of all males. All of the feminists I've ever spoken to have encouraged open discussion on all issues. So I'm trying to figure out if by that post you mean "sit back and let others do the talking for you sometimes" or "shut up; don't have opinions, someone else will tell you what to think." If it's the former, you have a point, but it's not one I've ever encountered and I've encountered many brands of feminism (but that's getting into my personal life, so if you want to discuss that more we're taking it off of Slashdot). If it's the latter, I pity you; you've apparently been shouted down by people who are either hypocrites or psychos, and in this case I'm not sure which is worse.
But either way, we're speaking on different wavelengths. I'm trying to talk about racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice. You speak of the more common targets thereof. We've both got some interesting ideas, but we're comparing apples and oranges (OK, probably more like oranges and lemons; they do have a relation but they're still different things).
A Republican? Being accused of Homophobia? Frankly, it's not surprising, given the history of the party, and the current practices of its presidential candidates. The fact is, you're a member of a group that *does* discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. That's your choice. No offense was intended by this post. I'm aware that not all Republicans are homophobes, but the party line is homophobic.
So it's guilt by association, now? The sins of the father weighing on the son, to put it into a different perspective? But that's still no different from the homophobia you claim to see in Republicans.
How many people here associate with a political party but don't really follow the party line perfectly? Probably not all that many. Most people don't fit party lines exactly. Party lines are too specific, whereas a group of people is still comprised of individuals (statistics are a real pain when your data subjects are sentient, you know?)
There was something that I did find interesting, though. Studies of past elections have shown that more Repiblican voters are willing to break their party line than Democrats are. What I'm wondering is, why? Does this mean Republicans tend to see something wrong with their party, so they vote for others? Does it mean Democrats just don't tend to think about issues and vote blindly with their party? Does it mean Democrats are somehow morally superior to Republicans, and Republicans voting for Democrats are really just having conscience attacks? Or is it something else? I don't know, though I very much doubt it's the third.
But now I'm getting completely offtopic, so I'll stop...
I'm not sure if it is even nessesary to prove that the offending statement is false, only that it was written with the intention to harm someone.
You could maliciously ruin someone's reputation without telling blatant lies. Does that make it right? In some cases maybe, in other cases not. In this case a court of law will apparently be deciding if this was ok or not.
Completely seperate from the question if the offended professor has a case or not, after reading some of the comments on that page, it's not surprising that he was offended, and that he will do whatever he can to have those posts removed. Politely asking the webmaster to moderate the posts apparently had no effect, so what else could he do? In a perfect world freedom of speech includes the freedom to violate every law of courtesy and decency. If you live by this principle in the real world however, you'll find you make no friends, and get beaten up regularly.
The link from the teacher review page to his home page is wrong - it should be http://fog.ccsf.org/~dbrown/
Sure, I'm not disagreeing with the concept of the teacherreview web site, I'm just answering bludstone's question. I think the web site operator is on dodgy ground, he's publishing potentially libellous material. It's not the same as slashdot, where the discussions are clearly contributor opinions only, he's recommending that people use the reviews on his site to decide which teacher to use. He should exercise editorial control if he's going to do that.
There's a good reason for a nondisclosure period. The point is that the prof shouldn't be able to see the results until the grades are in. Note that unless it's the prof's first year on the job, the professor will have built up a track record one way or the other.
Besides, who's going to disparage a bad professor on the official U reviews?
As someone who's been reviewed, I can inform you that the students don't seem unwilling to speak their minds ( either way ) on those reviews.
They'de collected before grades are entered
Sure, because they need to be filled out when the class is still in session ( ie before its broken up and hence before grades are out ).
However, the prof isn't allowed to see the reviews until the grades are in ( this is true at every school I've been at. I bet it's true with yours -- check !!! )
Unless he's tenured, that is.
WRONG. Tenured or not, the profs are still subject to the same evaluation process, and the fact that a prof is tenured does not imply that their evaluations are undisclosed.
I have to wonder, if he hates teaching English, why did he spend all those years getting a Ph.D, a teaching position and tenure?
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
I'm not sure whether I agree with this guy suing or not, cuz the site is slashdotted so I haven't read the comments about him. But the point of the defamation laws is to prevent abuse of the first amendment. Do you think it would be OK if I posted on my high-traffic website that you were a child molestor? The reason that this is tortious is becuase you have no chance to defend yourself. If I say something that is completely unfounded by the facts, and it irrevocably damages your character (what if you were denied a job becuase of this), you definitely have the right to sue.
-Matt
After all, a bad grade represents a professor's bad opinion of the student.
Turnabout is fair play, IMO.
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Should we throw another human wave of structural engineers at stabilizing the Leaning Tower of Pisa, or should we just let the damn thing fall over and build a tower that doesn't suck?
-- Neal Stephenson comenting on why Linux kicks ass
Actualy, the quote was talking about why BeOS Kicked ass, not linux. He does really like linux, but not for that reason.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
of a professor (Laurence Godfrey) suing the UK 's largest ISP (Demon) over something posted on USENET. In this case the ISP caved.
Read the story on Wired.
--
E_NOSIG
I'd be interested in forming a site for positive teacher reviews only. This would be to find the highest quality instructors and lecturers in the nation. This information could then be used to form video lecture series and course material for the free university project.
LetterRip
fstmm@yahoo.com
I guess I wasn't clear. I, like you and many others, studied throughout college. I did my work. The people who crammed did so because they didn't do their work.
Big difference. The crammers didn't care about the courses they were taking. They cared about what their parents would think so that they would buy them a car. So they tried to put as much information in their heads the night and morning before the exam, knowing full well that they'll forget it upon leaving to go home (driving in their new car).
I went to school for me, not my parents. I even kept my books and I still read/use them like I did in college. I'd rather have a good X86 architecture book than ~$50.
What bugs me is when spoiled kids complain about getting low marks simply because they're used to getting what they want. (I grew up sorta poor so maybe I'm being unnecessarily bitter.)
Flamage can have value, IMHO. If his students are this worked up, I'll bet he really is a crappy teacher.
This seems doubtful. I have seen many students get worked up over something stupid like a mild accent. Note: Undergraduates normally do not put in the time to mastere the fine art of lissening to crazy accents that graduate students must master, so I see undergrads bitching about a profs who really dose a good job once you get past the accent.
The libel laws are pretty clear and the web site should win, but it would be nice to have a feature to prevent duplicate reviews AND maintain anonymity. I think you could do it with an online voting algorithm, i.e. you only get one vote, but the site can not tell which vote was yours.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
It is probably quite a bit different if the class is full, though.
The cake is a pie
Does anyone use these sites, trust them?
.. " and because I know they know me, and I know how they like classes run, I would weight their opinion much more than another.
How accurate (considering accuracy is pretty subjective here) are sites like this? I can't imagine going to one of these sites and giving it much weight at all. No doubt every teacher has had problems with some students and vice versa at one time or another. I would think students who are upset are more likely to post reviews.
I would like to see students note what teaching styles they like and how they thought the teacher taught rather than just some "good/bad" reviews. I've had teachers who's classes I've taken and we did not get along at all, we just had different styles of research, we did not see eye to eye on anything, and I hated the class, but that's not necessarily that teachers fault.
Personally I usually talk to people who have taken the class. I have some friends who would tell me "he/she sucks! they're terrible" and while I would take the info, I wouldn't weight it very high since I know them well enough to know they hate that subject to start. Other friends I would tell me "you would not like this class .
I took a look at a number of professors from several schools and the posts were very "troll/flamebaitish." Very little explanation of why they felt the teacher "had no idea what they were talking about" or why they "blow gaots hard." Just allot of he/she sucks because he is a _____. It mostly was useless info from some students who couldn't spell check "goats" correctly before posting. There also was plenty of "he/she is great" with equal lack of explanation.
Please note, I am not posting this anonymously. I respect the need for Anonymous Coward posting, but there are times when there is also a need for people to post their thought and be willing to put a name behind them. This is such a case.
Anyone sane is concerned about negative things being said about them. It is part of how we function as human beings and an important part of what make it possible for us to build large, complex societies. We fear being cast into the outer darkness. That phrase itself echoes back to the fear of being driven from the warmth and safety of the tribal campfire into the predator-filled night.
For an individual, the lose of reputation can be devistating. Depending on the nature of the allegations, it can mean the loss of a career, a marriage, friends, a home. Yes, this web site has the potential to do that. And there is a fine line that it must walk to be effective. It must retain that power. Criticism, robbed of all power to harm has no teeth. On the other side, when it is wielded brutally, and manipulatively, it loses its credibility.
This is no different from the delicated editorial balance maintained in other media. The variety of sources for the information has increased. The immediacy of both submission and access is much greater. But this is not much different from other methods of criticism running a full spectrum from reasoned debate between public figures who both have reputations to defend to graffiti spray-painted on bridge abutments.
Without a means to criticize those elements of a society who have exceeded its limits in some way, we are forced to accept that those individuals will continue in their actions. We expand the scope of acceptible behaviour a little. Silencing dissent sanctions the behaviour it would criticize. Giving it free rein with no review allows it to be characterized as a personal vendetta without merit.
As society moves online, there is a need for institutions that meet its needs to move with it. It is wonderful to be able to shop online. It is wonderful to be able to communicate with my friends, family and colleagues. But if we abandon the means by which we obtain reliable information about the reputations of other members of society, or worse still outlaw those means, we will have reduced the capacity of our society to hold itself together.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
If this professor wins, imagine what it could do to VA/Andover/Rob... For all the (sometimes deserved) thrashings Signal 11 takes whenever he posts, the guy could be an instant millionaire!
--
--
E2 IN2 IE?
Ha! this is too easy :)
Lets take a look at my favorite paragraph
"He's not just a passive provider like America Online," Curzon-Brown told London.
AOL? Passive? they are probably the least passive isp out there! Besides their intensive waste of cds at my expense, and how aol 5.0 "took over" a users computer, there is all the Spam. They sell email adresses to advertisers people.. how many isps do that?
"He's actually pointing to certain teachers and saying, 'Don't take these teachers. Look at their grade point average.'
Tell me exactly why teachers can grade students on their performance but students cant grade proffesors on theirs?
And the horrible part of it is, those grade point averages are based on reviews by people who were never their students.
Most of the reviewers mention if they are students.
Or by the same angry students sending in multiple reviews, so your grade point average is a lie to begin with, and yet the webmaster is saying, 'Use this to choose your classes.' I don't know what to say. How can anyone defend this?"
Watch me.
Just read the reviews. I mean, there are B's and F's on this guy. This contradiction must mean something. And if the students feel a need explore that, they should have the ability.
---
no
The point of this web site is a forum for students to give criticism to schools and professors as anonomous cowards. When you fill out those course reviews on your prof before you get your grade you are never sure if that prof will recognize your handwriting and grade you down. Sites like this provide a truly anonymous way for the students to provide feedback to the professors. The professor just needs to learn how to read the reviews appropriately. It's like reading Slashdot, -1 troll, -1 offtopic, +5 insightful. Any student in the class can tell between these type of posts. The big problem as far as I see it, is that a few student activists can fusk everything up by posting hundred of trolls and generally the disgruntled students will be the ones posting. The only true solution would be to have one vote per student but this requires some method of identifying the students who post and thus prevents the free nature of the site.
Any suggestion for improvement of such a review site?
no sig.
If you aren't Christian, you ought to be unbiased enough to see that the sig is simply fact--nothing more. However, as someone who is familiar with Christianity, I believe that impeding moral progress is more a property of Christian institutions rather than of Christianity itself. Christ was a radical--we can't forget that. Most modern conservative "Christian" views are incompatible with Christ's actual ideas.
I contend that all organized religions are enemies of moral progress because their stability depends on lack of change. In times of change people tend to think for themselves. This is bad for organized religion for obvious (to the non-brainwashed) reasons.
Possibly any belief in the existance of a god or gods by itself is at odds with the concept of human morality. This is why. The theist system of morality goes like this:
Group of people invents god -> god dictates moral code -> Group attempts to impose moral code on other, incompatible hunmans, resulting in mush suffering -> Repeat.
The humanist system of morality, on the other hand, goes something like this:
Humans with different ideas about morality sit down and work things out with minimal loss of life.
See--much simpler, easier, and doesn't make irrational assumtions or encourage hate and prejudice.
Moreover, Bertrand Russel is awesome and you should have a Bertrand Russel sig too.
P.S. Thomas Jefferson said this:
"The Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually the same god as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three-headed monster; cruel, vengeful, and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three-headed, beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites."
So... Ha Ha! So much for those right-wing conservative bastards who say "let's get rid of this separation of church and state crap so we can get back to the REAL values this country was founded on: CHRISTIAN values, reflecting the CHRISTIAN ideas of our founding fathers, who were all CHRISTIAN." For the ignorant folks out there, this is crazy because the first six presidents of the U.S. were deists, and OUR COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED ON THE RADICAL NOTION OF FREEDOM FROM RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION, DAMMIT! THAT'S WHY WE CAME OVER HERE! We cannot have this freedom without the separation of church and state--it is one of the most "sacred" of our country's values, next to freedom of speech. (No, not the right to carry ridiculously powerful assault weapons. Yes, we know they're for "hunting" purposes only.)
Excuse my rant.
-- Religion is a major weapon in the war against reality.
Where did you get this information? According to the article, it is quite clear that the target of the suit is teacherreview.com, not the school:
Daniel Curzon-Brown, a professor at San Francisco City College, is one of the teachers reviewed on the site. He has filed a lawsuit against the site's webmaster claiming defamation and emotional distress.
Have you read something that tells a different story?
I think this is the same analogy the ACLU was using, but I disagree with it somewhat. I think a more prudent analogy would be: What if you were the owner of a wall with a sign on it that said, "Please spray-paint your opinions of [public figure] here." In both cases, teacherreview.com and the graffiti, it is obvious that the proprietor is not responsible for the what other people say, except that he does invite people to say it by using a medium he provides. IMO, that means the guy does have to take some responsibility for the content of his site, but said content is obviously not libelous or slanderous (as I understand it.) IMO, the webmaster has done nothing wrong, though I think the guy who wrote the review is a putz; he hasn't even taken the class!
Yep, the two stories are completely different. It could be a seperate suit altogether (your link refers to a "group of instructors," or it might be the same guy suing both Ryan and the school. Go figure.
I've got my share of bad teachers during my school days (which aren't finished yet). Let's face it : there will always be good teachers, bad teachers and "bad and arrogant" teachers.
This last category is the worst. I've seen teachers that didn't want to give the maximum grade because they considered that was destined only to them, thus lowering your GPA. I saw teachers that gave you an incomplete even if you did well on the exam just for the fun of having you retaking that exam and spend the summer learning. Some of them made sarcastic comments regarding a wrong answer from their students (like "if you can prove this to me I'll give you a PhD").
At one point or another we all experienced this. It doesn't make it right, but this is the way it is.
Does this mean we should simply ignore the problem ? Definitely no.
Yet, I read some of the comments of the students, and I think they definitely deserve their teacher. Ok, he's a lousy teacher, but this doesn't give you any right to curse him like that. Besides, if one doesn't understand that cursing someone hardly make him one's friend, then he should avoid expressing himself in public.
I suppose the reaction of the teacher is even understandable in this case. Although I can't see why he is sueing the web site. After all, they are a simple messenger. Destroying the site won't change the opinion of his students. On the contrary.
Then again, from my experience I could also tell that although the goal of the site is meritory, it probably won't do too much good.
The best professors I've had until now were very special human beings and during the years they earned my respect without being too concerned about this. And this includes my respect both as teachers and as persons.
On the other hand, I found that the main characteristic of the bad teachers was that they never tried to meet the requirements of the students, they never tried to "teach". They were exposing the material and that was it. The students always were a "hurd" with whom they had to spend their precious time.
And since the bad teachers don't care about the opinions of their students anyway, why bother giving those grades ?
What is really going on here?
Let's say that there is a set standard for education in a particular field. For example, let's say that the English 1A class is standardized across all the Universities, so that when a student graduates from this class, no matter where he took it, he will have the same understanding and command of English as any other student who graduated from this class with the same grade.
Let's say further that this standard is reasonable: it is neither too lenient (i.e., crediting students for comprehension they do not have or else failing to require a necessary level of comprhension), nor too strict (i.e., it does not demand of students an unnecessary or excessive level of comprehension).
So we have a universal standard, and we agree that the standard is reasonable. This results in a curriculum that reflects this standard, and it results in a requirement that the teachers teach this curriculum. Any teacher who teaches to a lower standard does their students a grave disservice, especially if they then pass these students as having met the standard. Teachers who teach to a higher standard may not fail their students, if they raise their students to the standard (and possibly above it). Teachers that teach to a higher standard, and abandon the laggards in their classroom, and finally fail them, are as bad as those that teach too leniently. Finally, teachers that are just plain incompetent also fail their students--though arguably no more or less than teachers too strict or too lenient.
But what about teachers who rigorously and competently teach the standard, but are burdened by unprepared students? There are a number of memes out there relating to the abysmal education our high-school students receive. This education supposedly prepares them to achieve the college-level standards, but may in fact fail to do so.
Is it the good teacher's fault that so many of his students fail? Should he call his class English 1A, but actually teach a remedial course? Wouldn't this be the same sort of teaching that allegedly goes on at the high-school level, where students are passed, for whatever reason except the only reason that matters: because they have learned the material?
Looking to the students who fail may provide some insight into the skill of the teacher, but disgruntlement should never be taken seriously in a vacuum.
IMHO, the solution to apparent bad teaching is obvious: if a teacher is failing a disproportionate number of students, this is immediately and painfully obvious to anyone who might care--the University administration, for example. In theory, this should be enough to warrant a review of the standard, the curriculum, and the teaching methods of the instructor. The administration can interview, survey, and poll the students, and draw rational conclusions both from their own observations and the data collected.
Websites like the one discussed here are almost completely beside the point.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
Frankly, I think they're missing the point. From the website in question :
"Take better classes: R e a d t h e R e v i e w s Who's best to take and who should you avoid?"
"Teacher Review was created to help foster communication among the City College of San Francisco student body and to be a useful tool for students to use in obtaining a more rewarding educational experience. ... we can discover instructors who are conducive to our learning style without ever setting foot in a classroom."
Now I'm sure that there are plenty of "websites or bulliten boards" where students "exchange opinions". The difference is that they don't set themselves up as a media resource. I see this website as trying to do just that, and thus I hold them to some standards of accountability. Its the difference between sponsering a "vacation discussion group" and claiming to be "a resource for planning your vaction and avoiding tourist traps." Teacher review tried to have it both ways, and I don't have much sympathy for them. An accurate disclosure would read something like this:
No attempt has been made to verify the accuracy of statements made below. "Reviews" are submitted by volunteers, rather than solicited from a fair representation of students, do not require accountability, and are sometimes submitted based on heresay by students who have never taken classes by the professor in question. As a result, this website may or may not have any value whatsoever for a student looking for a challenging but instuctive course.
Now you could do a good job of teacher reviews by forbidding annonymous postings, asking what class they took and what grade they recieved and then soliciting opinions from other students who aren't self selecting by bile before giving a ranking, but that would be work. Work, however, it what is needed to bill yourself as a resource worth listening to. Otherwise, you should just be honest and call yourself a discussion forum with no claims to be providing information that would allow a student to safely dismiss or pick an instructor "without setting foot in the classroom."
-Kahuna Burger
...will work for Chick tracts...
So, please, don't tell me there are no such bad teachers because life is a bitch and the Murphy's laws always work out as prescribed. I don't know this particular prof., so I wouldn't talk about him but trust me, there are such FUCKING MOTHER FUCKERS out there in the universities with such FUCKING attitudes that those MOTHER FUCKING FUCKERS simply must be put to sleep through lethal injections.
You can't handle the truth.
Here's a random quote from one of the reviewers, regarding the performance of a CS instructor:
He is one of the worst instructor that I'd have. programing since I was 14 year old and I would love to challenge this guy to program anytime. His knowledges in computer science is very limited and I doubt this guy was major in computer science in his undergraduated program. DO NOT TAKE HIS CLASS because you will better off reading the dietel book than taking this guy class.
Well, if the syntax in this guys programs is anything like the syntax in his English, he should not be so critical. I was ROTFL.
You should re-post this story with the "It's funny. Laugh." logo.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
This story is most interesting because it's representative of academia's new watchfulness of the internet. I'm a student at columbia university, and we have a controversy surrounding a service called Versity.com. Basically, versity pays people to take notes in the larger lecture courses. These notes get posted on the internet and students can join versity (i believe for free) and see the notes. The professors here are concerned about the intellectual property of their lectures. My history professor told the class that some people in the university structure were considering suing versity.com. One of my friends takes notes for versity, and his teacher made him stand up in a huge lecture hall, and chewed him out for the above reason, and for undermining the "academic integrity" of the school.
Interesting, no? Although we generally think of higher education as at least one stronghold of the net, and of free speech, it seems like this isn't quite as true as we imagined. Especially not in the non-science disciplines.
peas,
-Kabloona
What the Supreme Court says is whatever the person who interprets it says it means. I had one lawyer say that the ADA is dead due to the rulings last year. I disgree, it's just ill.
I see the case he cited, not as a libel case but more towards a "hate speech" type of issue.
IANAL, I just play one in my lawsuit with Mattel.
Fight Spammers!
Fight Spammers!
A crime is brought by the government (the people, the state, the commonwealth, etc). It is punished by locking the wrongdoer in prison (sometimes just a fine). Defamation is not a crime in the United States. Maybe in other countries.
Fight Spammers!
Opinions cannot be libelous, unless they imply libelous facts. In other words you can't have a wrong opinion. Or at least legally.
You can always win nominal damages ($1), if you prove that it is libel.
Fight Spammers!
This case is regarding a class of citizens, not an individual (or company). This is like saying that all blacks are child molesters. This is not saying Joe Smith is a child molester.
But does criminal libel exists (and more importantly enforced) now or within the last 20 years?
Fight Spammers!
Of couse the ACLU won on that, otherwise it would not have been mentioned on their website.
Fight Spammers!
Fight Spammers!
But that's just the point, if you posted on your high traffic website that I was a child molestor and it was untrue (don't we hope) and you had nothing to back it up, then that's you yourself trying to defame me in the eyes of others. Proving that this action actually harmed me in some way may be tougher, but that would be my problem.
In this situation you have a bunch of anonymous yahoos from a school who didn't like said professor posting their views in a public forum. If I want to go out in the street and scream that Slashdot sucks, I can do it, and Slashdot can sue me if their readership suddenly drops due to my crusade (yeah, right!) but they certainly can't sue the city for having a street there for me to scream in.
I do think that the proprietor of the website should work on a better filtering system, surely the content of the class has no relation to childish reviews that simply try to insult the teacher.
All I can say is thank God that we still have the first amendment right to say that any professor who is suing the website over the words of others must suck. You suck professor!
(Now prove that I've just libeled you in a court of law) (Didn't think so)
--Mad Dreamer
I've had some profs bust my balls and I loved every minute of it. They would somehow show that the work was not only important for finding a grading scale but also for our own tangible good. There are hard profs and there are hard profs that INSPIRE.
I'll also say that some profs are more inspiring to different people. For example, I have a physics prof that I like a lot but has been seriously disliked by everyone else I know. I think the reason is because 1) I'm not going for the grade cause "C-" (D = not pass) is fine with me, 2) I like how he derives stuff instead of wasting time on showing examples.
As for students that complain 1) if the prof really sucks drop the class, 2) if its cause you're not working hard enough then enjoy the grade you get -- you earned it. I get low grades in some of my classes but I don't care, if I didn't care about the class why should I care about the grade -- in nowise go whining about it.
I personally think I was graded unfairly once, but its a wierd situation where I didn't work to my full potential but niether did the rest of my class...as it turns out I think the prof realized I was like one out of 3 people that actually cared about the class (and thus the grade as a reflection of my effort), expected more out of me, and graded me unfairly low (compared to other students, but not low compared to absolute standards) to add a little fire in my belly. It worked -- I don't totally respect him for it but I don't hate him for it (at least not after talking with him about it).
I run the site PHS Sucks, which I set up to criticize the administration at my high school. I put up some posters in the school, and the result has been that the administration is trying to hunt me down. I have heard from students who have heard from teachers, and one with direct knowledge of the administration, that I am a high priority.
I have been able to remain anonymous thus far, and while some have criticized me for doing so, I think it's the only safe thing for now.
The school administration should not be able to punish students for using their free speech to criticize the school. But they do, and while the student may be able to win in court eventually, that is something no one wants to go through.
Anyway, to any other high school students out there contemplating setting up a website, I say go for it. You may want to remain anonymous for safety though. In any case, I would highly recommend making it abundantly clear that if the administration tries to retaliate in any way, you will also. The last thing the principal wants is your URL on the front page of your local paper, or on huge signs around the town. If they know you won't give up, they may think twice before giving you some Draconian punishment.
The other aspects of your post are dealt with in other replies, so I'll leave them there. Besides, I tried responding and ended up with a five-page rant on the differences between a teacher who is simply hard and a teacher who is both hard and good, since you obviously don't understand that. Yes, a good teacher is demanding, but it takes much more than high standards to make a good teacher. Take it from someone who's known some of the best of the best, and some of the worst of the worst. But I'm ranting again...
o us, and probably all five. In other words, a total bastard. Blinded by their own prejudices, they can't possibly conceive of the possibility that I just might have a human heart. And while I do derive a bit of perverse pleasure from proving them wrong every single time, I still don't see why I or anyone else should have to do that.
No, I'm going to talk about the "homophobia" bit. Frankly, looking over the reviews, I don't see a shred of it. Not a single reviewer gave any indication of having a problem with the fact that the professor was gay. Plenty of them had problems with the fact that the professor was a jerk about being gay. I don't blame them; I also have problems with people who are jerks about being gay. Just as I have problems with people who are jerks about being straight, bi, celibate, or whatever. Does that make me homophobic? I don't particularly think so; just someone who doesn't like jerks.
For that matter, there's another thing I don't like. And it has some bearing on your post. Some people reading this might have seen this rant some time ago, but I think it applies again here. I'll put it to you straight: I'm white, male, Republican, straight, and Christian. Because of those factors, I find that every single thing I say and do is scrutinized quite intensely by people who don't even know me, looking for the slightest trace of racism, sexism, reactionism, homophobia, and lunatic zealotry. Why? Simply put, because of several coincidences involving my birth and subsequent upbringing, they assume I'm at least some combination of racist/misogynist/reactionary/homophobic/overzeal
You are no different from them. You took the words of people you don't even know. Not finding anything immediately offensive to support your own prejudice, you read something completely inappropriate from the posts with absolutely no evidence to support your claims. And then you waltzed into Slashdot accusing them of homophobia.
Racism, sexism, homophobia, hypersensitivity (be it racial, religious, political, or whatever in origin); they're all the same thing. They come from the same sources: paranoia and disrespect. They end in the same thing: hate. And they cause the same things: inequity, injustice, and suffering. The differences between them are trivial at best; they are basically all the same. And you exhibited one of these in your post. Think about that for a while.
Read more carefully.
Actually, the review in question was from someone who had never taken his class, and therefore could not have gotten a bad grade. He simply stated that his current English teacher warned him not to curzon-brown's class.
While I'm sure you enjoyed bitching about all the people who were better then you in high school, but who actually turned out not to be anywhere near as smart as you is nether relevant to the discussion or at all.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
I have been working as well on a site much like teacherreview.com. I think that Ryan's (Creator of Teacher Review) site is laid out in such a way that it gives somewhat of fairness to teacher's and students. Students reporting on Teachers is a valid resource and one that is truely needed in this day and age.
When I choose what classes I want, I make damn sure that I ask around and find out what other students think of other teachers. Anyone that has been in any public collge can relate to some of the nightmares students have had with certain teachers. I look at this site as bringing word of mouth reviews to the web and I know it would be a great resource for my school. I think in all fairness that students should have a say in who to take because it is THEIR education and they are PAYING for this. We have a choice as students and more power to Ryan & TeacherReview.com.
I think this shines the light on Great Teachers and helps students find those great teachers. Pending this lawsuit's outcome, I will deploy my site for my school.
Good luck Ryan, TeacherReview and thanks to the American Civil Liberties Union for helping him out in this time of need. The outcome of this case might very well shape the future of the Internet!
If anyone knows of anything I can do to help Ryan & his site out please let me know.
Also thanks to the Great Teachers that are out there.
Gregg
------------------------------------ Step into my Office... WhY? Cuz your %$#$ing Fired...
Or by the same angry students sending in multiple reviews, so your grade point average is a lie to begin with, and yet the webmaster is saying, 'Use this to choose your classes.' I don't know what to say. How can anyone defend this?
Well, in fact, the webmaster states that he has been removing multiple reviews from the same person, where he can spot them. So you're probably actually getting a fair representation of how much people dislike this guy.
Flamage can have value, IMHO. If his students are this worked up, I'll bet he really is a crappy teacher.
If I were him, I'd think twice about suing. As Oscar Wilde said,"Never sue. They might prove it." Sure, he went on to ignore his own advice, but the point still stands. Can you imagine the professor sitting in class while the webmaster's lawyer calls student after student who says the class is a waste of time?
-- Support Ometz le-Serev.
I thought the CDA got repealed in '96 or '97.
Two provisions in the CDA that imposed censorship on electronic communications were found to be unconstitutional (and therefore cannot legally be enforced). That didn't affect the rest of the CDA, including the provision limiting liability of a service provider.
One interesting point here is that the Communications Decency Act, of all things, provides an absolute bar against such suits. A service provider cannot be held responsible for material posted by a user, and Lathouwers is a "service provider". He's offering an automated service which allows others to comment on teacher quality. Even if he does some manual editing, he doesn't lose that immunity. That was clearly established in a case involving AOL. So the case will probably be dismissed on Wednesday.
If Brown can show this professor did not feel that this was sneaky, then he may have a case.
As for reasonable care, it's an automated process. The site points out that these are the opinions of the authors. This is not a newspaper that takes something that was sent in and via manual process inserts it into the galley sheets.
It has been decided in a case with AOL (ZERAN v AMERICA ONLINE INC) that 230 (from the CDA) immunizes computer service providers. In Zeran, it was being argued that AOL did not remove the defamatory information quick enough. Even if this did not provide protection, Brown would have to show that they had notice of this. It does not look like he is making this argument.
As to the public figure, there is also limited public figure. That is if it is an issue of public concern. The quality of teaching could be considered public concern.
It is clearly marked that the information is opinion. Though you can't say in my opinion, X is a child molester and claim that it's only opinion and not actionable. The statements must be taken in context. Pritsker v. Brudnoy 452 N.E.2d 227 (1983), Cole v. Westinghouse 386 Mass 303 (1982).
I have my summary judgment motion regarding my case available for you to read.
Fight Spammers!
I attend Clemson University in South Carolina and my freshman year, a friend of mine created a page which does the exact same thing. The site, http://hubcap.clemson.edu/PSP/ryp.htm is located on the Phi Sigma Pi web site. A national Honors fraternity.
I believe it was a Dr. Li in the Math department (MTHSC) who threatened for several months to sue the web-site creator and the fraternity for libel. The school paper picked up the story and there was a big stink for a couple of months.
Now the lawsuit's basis was that the former web master (it is now automated via Perl) was attempting to remove profanity and total flamage from some of the posts. Dr. Li threatened to sue because of the fact that the former webmaster edited some of the submissions... just not enough b/c there was still profanity and the like. In the web masters defense, there were way too many submission for only one person and he had a hard time keeping up w/ both the site and his classes.
The KICKER here is that I was with this former web master when the idea presented itself. The presenter was another college professor who was meeting with students from the Honors College. He/she was one of the best professors I have had to date so its obvious why he/she pushed this concept. As a matter of fact, he/she remains one of the top ranked teachers on the site.
He/she was also a wonderful connection to have because any conversations between the faculty were forwarded to the former web master and friends and eventually to the web master's lawyer.
So, after several months of B.S., the buffon finally got over the whole liberal thing and the web site was transformed into an automated message board w/ a little math functionality to compute rankings. Go BigBlue!!!
How come no one ever reads the Bible anymore? If Judaism taught us one thing, it's 'an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.' This guy needs to quit his bawling and setup a student review web site. I can only imagine what professors must say about their students behind closed doors. Well, get some of that out into the open and make these kids eat their words. Let's get this brawl started, baby!
I can only imagine what they'd say about me:
This little bastard came in and told me how to do my job. The little prick. I made one stinkin' mistake on the blackboard and he had to point it out in a 'it is obvious that you made a mistake but I'll let you find it' question. That's right after waking up from a 45-minute nap which he pulled off in the front row! Pray to God you never get this kid.
I bet he has fun with little boys down on Polk Street.
Sheesh, honestly folks, if people are going to act childish, well, make sure they do it right, dammit.
The ACLU sued a school for suspending a student when he posted criticism of teachers on his web site.
Does anyone know how this turned out?
ACLU Defends Student Website in Case that Threatens Free Expression on the Internet
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, January 31, 2000
SAN FRANCISCO, CA -- In a case with important implications for free speech on the Internet, the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern
California has asked a Superior Court to dismiss a lawsuit aimed at shutting down a website that provides student reviews of the teachers at San
Francisco City College.
The lawsuit was filed in San Francisco Superior Court City College by professor Daniel Curzon Brown, who objects to what students had to say about his
teaching.
The ACLU, on behalf of Ryan Lathouwers, the creator of the Teacher Review website, says that the speech is protected under the First Amendment.
Other defendants in the suit, the San Francisco Community College District, which is the governing body of City College, and the Associated Students of
City College, agree.
"The Teacher Review website is a perfect example of how the Internet functions as a unique and valuable information source," said ACLU of Northern
California staff attorney Ann Brick. "If permitted to proceed, this case would sound the death knell for any website or bulletin board allowing members of
the public to exchange opinions."
A City College student himself at the time he created Teacher Review, Lathouwers said he wanted to provide an online resource for students trying to
decide which teachers and courses to select. At the time, there was no systematic way for students to find out just what other students who had taken a
class from any particular instructor had to say about the experience.
The website, with its student-authored reviews, was launched in September 1997. Since that time, more than 5,000 individual reviews of nearly 600 City
College instructors have been posted. The site, which has proved very popular with students, has been visited over 100,000 times.
Curzon Brown, a tenured English professor, was rated on the website as one of the ten worst teachers at City College. Student reviews of Curzon Brown
include comments like "pompous," "the most egotistical extremist there is" and "the worst teacher I have ever had the opportunity of knowing."
"Imagine a liberal arts professor unable to tolerate his students expressing their own opinions, and unwilling to allow students to draw their own
conclusions from what others have to say," said Bernard Burk of Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin, who is representing Lathouwers as
a cooperating attorney with the ACLU of Northern California. "Fortunately, the First Amendment prevents people like Professor Curzon Brown from
using lawsuits to silence their critics."
Last October, Curzon Brown filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of himself and all other City College employees "who have been or will be defamed by
the content of Teacher Review." His suit seeks monetary damages, and an injunction prohibiting the posting of "defamatory" reviews on the website and
prohibiting either City College or the Associated Students from linking to Teacher Review.
A hearing is scheduled for March 29th in San Francisco Superior Court.
The case is Curzon-Brown v. San Francisco Community College District. In addition to Burk and Brick, the case is being litigated by Celia P. Van Gorder
and Sean A. Pager of Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin, and ACLU of Northern California attorney Margaret Crosby. A copy of the
ACLU's motion is available online at http://www.aclunc.org.
Sounds a Dr Lan whos class I walked out of a
...
:-)
few times...
On his test in C/Unix the question was:
What is the shell in unix called?
The "correct" answer was csh.
The wrong answers include:
/bin/sh sh shell ksh tcsh
When I posted part of his test to usenet, I was amazing how no one seemed to know the "correct" answers.
When I appealed the grade (he claimed to have given me a C to be nice but siad I deserved a D) I had included printouts of posts from comp.lang.c. When he asked who these people were, I handed him a white book with a blue C on the front and said "one of them wrote this". His comment was they hadn't reviewd the book and would not consider it to help my case.
The professor used to loose my assignments that were emailed to him. Funny, the sendmail logs showed it getting to his server. Why did he only loose stuff from EE/CE students and not CS students...hmmm.
I think I'll write a letter to UMC asking for my money back. Maybe I should get a lawyer to write it
The libel laws are clear. If this person is giving opinion, then it can't be libel. If it is stated as fact, then it may be.
The statment
is clearly not libelous.Publications on the web should be held to be the same standard as the newspapers.
Inflamatory opions are not libel. Wrong opinios are not libel.
What some companies, such as Mattel , are using the libel laws as a way to quiet dissent or negative publicity.
This guy appears to be trying to do the same.
This is the review, I believe he is suing over.
Fight Spammers!