I’m terribly sorry I had to do this through my blog, this is not easy for me at all, honestly. This post may be the last memory we ever share on this blog, but I have to come clean: I’m done with you because I decided to be with your best friend #ds106. I know this is cold, and I’m really sorry. Don’t let it get you all upset inside, we had a good run, and we seemed to respect each others space. I didn’t exploit you, never took your name in vain to make money, never even did a presentation about you—that said you were quite the icebreaker—and you certainly garnered me more attention than I deserved. For a while there I though we really had a future together, but your history of flirting and seducing the neo-liberals who want to dismantle public institutions has been a real turn off. In fact, the last straw has been your indecent exposure in the title of yet another book by Anya Kamanetz that keeps me from being even remotely interested in continuing this relationship with you.
I mean, when did you stop dating journalists and start dating advocates for a mechanized vision of DIY education? You and I had deep institutional roots, and I am still proud to serve the public mission, why have you turned from this vision? I don’t know, EDUPUNK, I’m confused. I know I don’t own you, I know I have to let you go, but damn it….I loved you once! And I have a feeling your new lovers have moved away from any pretense of “reporting the state of education” and into the realm of advocating for a new corporate ed model. What’s more, I’m afraid they might continue to pimp out your good name—so be careful out there–it is a money hungry world. It might seem all fun and good right now, but just wait until they stick you in a cubicle and have you cold calling kids for that much needed education insurance they’ll need when corporations control the educational field.
I know the Gates Foundation has lots of money (heck they have been throwing millions and millions of dollars at education for years now, look how that has gone) but their vision of education as a wholesale gutting of publicly funded institutions and replacing them with some groovy YouTube vidoes (a la Khan Academy)and a wide range of powerpoint slides (a la Open Coursware) is a surefire means to further alienate an already fractured culture.
But don’t get me wrong, I will miss a lot of things about you, like the time you flirted with my father at our family Christmas dinner. But in the end you’ve changed, and what saddens me most is that you really couldn’t control how others would use you, you’re just a word after all—though a quite attractive one for many a marketer it seems. I mean, let’s face it, EDUPRENUER has nothing on you, you are much more seductive. But, we both know nobody can ever take away the rush of that first few months we had—it was a beautiful time, and when they all have forgotten you and left you for dead, I’ll de there, and we’ll start fresh again.
I love you, but I have to say goodbye—I don’t own you, but I did make you, damn it!!!
Brought tears to my eyes. The ultimate breakup letter. Someone called me by her name once. It was a compliment then.
Speaking of youtube videos and not owning others and being owned by them, it might be worth revisiting Klaus Nomi:
As for getting appropriated by the edu-meatgrinder machine, guess it’s time to create another mole for them to take a whack at.
I’m brought to wonder, after watching a concept deeply rooted in independent idealism devolve to yet another catchphrase, whether all good ideas are destined to be diluted and exploited in the end – a la “Web 2.0.” The cynic in me says yes.
All the more reason to keep pressing ahead. Don’t look back, Rev, there are bigger fish to fry now.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Dear EDUPUNK, | bavatuesdays -- Topsy.com
ahh …. the fickle nature of relationships shows through – take heart my friend there will be another and it will be better
DS106 might just be the new name for EDUPUNK. Next year it might be called something else. Name alone might not matter. It’s what is inside that counts. That is, the feeling or urge to produce and participate with others. Jim, keep the feeling alive and keep creating that urge in others. Thanks.
I think you could do me the favor of addressing me in the second person since we’ve known each other for a few years now.
I’m not a pimp (nice sexist language there). I’m not in the employment of any corporation other than Mansueto Ventures Inc. which publishes Fast Company Magazine. I’ve turned down multiple offers to be on advisory boards to for-profit educational startups. I’m also not a career academic like you whose paycheck is signed by an existing educational institution. I only have a BA. Therefore, my research and advocacy and yes, presentations (what’s so horrible about presentations? I saw you give a pretty great one in Vancouver in ’09) on the future of education are funded by nonprofit foundations, organizations including schools, and publications. I’m publishing two e-books on the future of education this year that are both funded by foundations and distributed for free to anyone who wants them. The will have a CC-BY-SA license.
I use the term “edupunk,” sparingly, to convey the message that learners are empowered and responsible for their own learning, and that they should seize the tools and techniques of openness to do so. I don’t have a single, pure vision for the institutional structure(s) within which open learning can, will, and should take place. I didn’t think that you did either, considering that the definition of edupunk you gave me was: “Edupunk is about the utter irresponsibility and lethargy of educational institutions, and the means by which they are financially cannibalizing their own mission.”
That doesn’t sound to me like someone who is committed to defending to the death the existing system of public institutions in the face of all comers.
I have some intuitions that the future has to do with things like open accreditation and widespread translation, as well as massive amounts of federal money such as the $2 billion just allocated to create open textbooks for community colleges. Corporations like McGraw Hill and Apple and the Washington Post Co. will continue to shape the future of education, for worse AND for better. So will the state and federal governments. So will private philanthropy, as it has done since before the founding of the American colony. So will talented and zealous career academics such as yourself. So will gadflies like me.
If I believed for one second that my work, to spread the word about tools such as open courseware, strategies such as peer-based learning and projects such as P2PU and LearnerWeb, was harmful in any way to the future of public education and, more importantly than the fate of any one institution, the broad public mission of education in the United States, I’d be totally aghast. But we’re just going to have to agree to disagree on that.
reminds me of that Dead Kennedys song, Edupunk for sale.
I’m completely broken up… we had something so special, I haven’t loved as deeply as when we loved. You brought me out of my shell, and together we brought something into the world that has now become bigger than either of us. I love how adults are now out their doing it on their own, they’ve taken it back. I believe we empowered them. I know that Paulo would be so proud of us having been together. Yes, yes I know I have strayed and I can see how our values and ideals no longer align as they once did, we were so in love… I can accept this breakup, because I know it is right; but it won’t be easy for I wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for you. Thank-you for pulling me out of my shell, and thank-you for letting me go. I really don’t want you to feel I am a part of you any longer. If I do come by your place late at night, please invite me in and lets make love like we did when we had just met. Thank-you, you will always be a part of me…
I have been playing this song all night, you cruel, cruel lover:
EDUPUNK seems to be taking this pretty hard, but I suspect it’ll be okay.
However, I need to take issue with the link to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V6KhdxKV0A – I actually listened to about 30 seconds of a Human League song!
That shit hurts!
I would rather see our system of public education (which really should not be conflated with the institutions currently delivering public education) dismantled piece by piece under the cover of appropriated buzzwords than have to listen to the Human League.
I mean, that stuff hurts.
“…like the time you flirted with my father at our family Christmas dinner”
Pingback: Lisa’s (Online) Teaching Blog » Blog Archive » The MOOC That Wasn’t
This was like one of those romantic movie sappy “good bye my lover” letter. I enjoyed the read, especially the last line: I love you, but I have to say goodbye—I don’t own you, but I did make you, damn it!!!
But if Anya had started a collaborative Internet radio station named Edupunk then that would that have been ok? Just what are the requirements to join the clique now?
RE: “Just what are the requirements to join the clique now?”
Thank you for asking! You too can join the EDUPUNK ™ Kool Kidz Klub for the low, low price of $10,000.48. For an extra 15 dollars, it comes with a t-shirt, and for an extra 25 dollars, you get the t-shirt, a bumper-sticker, and an iron-on decal. For an additional $50.00, and you get to pitch your idea to transform education to a Blue Ribbon Panel of Venture Philanthropists and Edupreneurs.
But act now! These deals won’t last! There are only 12 memberships remaining at this price!
I think Anya’s right actually.
Can’t help but think EDUPUNK as the title of your next book is not sparse use, but I may be wrong. And given you are an advocate for open education now, not a journalist per se, I would say my own problems with your use of the term for a guide is fair game. Also, I think you have a few facts about me wrong: I am not an academic, i am an instructional technologist. I don’t have tenure, and I have been taking more chances with my teaching and experimenting than probably most with tenure—given that—this cushy public institution line really annoys me. I believe in the public trust, and the pull quote in your comment is caricature of my ideas, and one you made sure to highlight in your book–like my chain smoking—to make me seem less than real. I’ve had many ideas about highered, like the “useful idiot” or even “never mind the edupunks” —I’ve thought an written about my problems from various perspectives, and to reduce my ideas to that quote almost three years seems p[art of the whole reductive force at work with EDUPUNk that seems to demand the breakup–at least for me.
I’m sure you wouldn’t be alone in that opinion, but right or wrong I’m kinda done with the concept being used as a catch-all pitch for “navigating” our current educational landscape, and the conflation with punk rock—like the quote on your recent post—is a big part of the issue. I guess your original followup with the punk ethos made sense then, but since has made the concept some kind of “punk rock” analog that it could never really fit comfortably in, which as well all have seen has been not all that useful. And if you are excited about the guide, awesome, I’m sure the Dummy’s Guide to EDUPUNK is not far behind 🙂 Sorry, but I can’t help but think this development disembodies any sense of a conversation into a series of resources and anecdotes—a far cry from a vital and living space. But hey, that’s just like one guy’s opinion, man! 😉
Pingback: The Wrong Notes | Tran|Script
Really, EDUPUNK is a clique now? Even though I want to be done with it? I mean, that’s the problem, any position I take or stance I make is gonna piss someone off, I can’t help that, but I also never turned it into club, and my problems with it being marketed as a “product” are real, and I stand by them.
Stay the course Jim. Its your destiny. You made a child. There can be no separation. Anya’s consistent, on message, risking appropriation. We all encouraged it, you’ve done a back flip.
You and I had deep institutional roots, and I am still proud to serve the public mission, why have you turned from this vision?
Confuses me. Does this mean to say: institutions = proud servitude to public mission? Was that the vision?
If Anya has strayed a path (leaving her makes this a sure thing) its because we are not engaging critique enough. This false break up letter is a critique. Anya, Edupunk, don’t be hurt, this is just a hissy fit, we boys have them from time to time. It hurts us all, but its necessary. Its good for you.
Where Jim is right, I think, is:
…neo-liberals who want to dismantle public institutions…
Those “neo libs” have disproportionate power in this “conversation”. Artifact lead by a bunch of middle to old aged men, stuck in a past of their LSD and New Earth better times, topped with a cocaine hangover of eco rationalism. They with their age crisis created a child that became the parent of Edupunk. Their’s too ran away. Now it too easily, dominates and distorts, and ultimately presses its ideology into things, suppressing the critical feedback they need, with their doughy eyed pleasure machines and DS106 love child.
Anya and anyone who has the lime light for the moment needs to be cautious of the freaky Globalists, and stay true to Conviviality.. Tools for Conviviality to be exact. Freedom is a word I’d rarely use without thinking.
I don’t want to “stay true’ to anything, I want to do what I want and not feel compelled by some idea of a word or the like. Just a few weeks ago Alex Hayes, that fuckface Peter, and yourself were going after me for not being “EDUPUNK” enough, you all can have it. I’m done with it, I have other things to do in my life. You’re right, Anya is free to do what she likes with it, as is anyone else, just leave me out of the equation for now–I like doing back flips for “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.” Hey, let someone else be the “cult of personality” —as you noted— and carry the mantle of truth and freedom—I’m gonna make some art damnit 🙂
I keep getting Mike Bogle and Mike Caulfield confused… maybe because the former’s avatar looks like the latter’s used to. Or something. All I know is it’s making my head hurt.
Jim – make art and fuck the rest of it. Anyone can do the other stuff, including both the Hordes of Trained Monkeys academia churns out and those hoping to make a buck on their own (or in support of the Gates Foundation for Educational Cluelessness). The first group stand out like suits in the creepy treehouse, the second all end up like Milliron. Why would you care about either?
@Jim I’m well aware that the root etymology of really both punk rock, cyberpunk, and EDUPUNK (if I can be so bold) is that, as William Gibson said “The street finds its own use for things.” Illich covers this as well in Tools for Convivality. The structure of tools can either empower man or trivialize him. And where tools attempt to trivialize, man has to subvert them, to move from product orientation to a needs orientation, to remember what the real point is and if necessary work against the tool.
That’s the context of that original post of mine, and maybe we’ve moved beyond it. But a guide that tells you how to subvert the existing system using the artifacts of that system seems to me more punk than anything else I’ve seen recently, and certainly more Illich. More than anything I’m doing really as well. It’s corporate, and legal, I suppose, but it reminds me of the original phone phreaking guides, which after all were sets of resources too.
But again, it may be just my opinion, man. That rug really did pull the room together.
I think Chris Lott’s response perfectly epitomizes what I’m frustrated with. In order to be in the “little OER” (to use Martin Weller’s distinction) cool kids club you have to view education just like them. Otherwise, you must clearly be a corporate sell-out. You are either with them or against them.
Earn a little grant money? Then you must be a mercenary and only have monetary concerns at heart. Have a PhD? Then you can’t produce thoughtful work and you are a “trained monkey” (unless, of course, you view education just as the cool kids do). Quantitative research? Forget about it.
I keep reading posts about higher ed. being in such dire straits. Sometimes it seems like the “little OER” people (as Martin Weller would make the divide) seem more interested in explaining evils of the “big OER” than helping learners. You would never know that tuition is problematic with some of the posts in the open ed blogosphere. No, the real problem is MIT OCW is the Antichrist.
“…any position I take or stance I make is gonna piss someone off, I can’t help that…”
Yes, that’s very true. But couldn’t Anya, or any of the “big OER” people say the same thing?
I’m sorry that thinking that “big OER” projects are a good start makes me either an idiot or immoral person. I have sacrificed thousands of dollars to help support open ed. I guess that’s not good enough for you.
Seth: I think you’re confusing my comments on two different sites. You’re certainly confused about what I’m saying in those comments.
Like most such terms, OER and open teaching and learning aren’t monolithic. But the first overwhelmingly gets it wrong and that’s what I’m talking about. Similarly, not everyone who works in academia is a member of the monkey horder, but academia churns out an overwhelming number of them. Not all grants are bad, but many of the largest granting agencies are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. PhD work, particularly quantitative research on educational practice, doesn’t all amount to angel-counting, but every time I have to wade through the literature I am reminded that most does. Etc. etc.
If you aren’t one of the monkeys, if you aren’t focused on content and missing the process and context, or whatever else, then bully for you. But it looks like your skill at paying attention to what you read could use a little work and you protest an awful lot considering you don’t rank yourself amongst the accused… and I’m not categorizing or excluding you, I have no way of knowing who you are or what you do (or don’t do).
I should note, Seth, that I suspect I know who you are, but I assume you are purposefully not linking your comments to any of your public identity.
If the shoe/glove doesn’t fit, don’t wear it/consider yourself acquitted.
Pingback: Dear EDUPUNK, | weiterbildungsblog
Just like fashion, these trends go in cycles. It won’t be long before we have learning objects and open educational resources on the forefront of our collective thinking once again, but with a different name, like “shared educational media products”, or ShEMP for short.
Similarly, EDUPUNK will surely evolve into EDUGOTH, EDUPIRATE, or, in the worst case scenarios, EDUPUBLICIMAGELTD or EDUBIGAUDIODYNAMITE. (But never, ever, EDUSK8.)
Speaking of which, I thought I heard a phrase who’s return may announce a whole new era of instant exploitation–Chris, did you just say “creepy treehouse”? Maybe we can call it “filthy ice cream truck” this time around…
Pingback: Ian T. Thomas » Blog Archive » EdTech and EduPunks
Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated?
I don’t know what’s happening, I refuse to believe it!
“Your comment is awaiting moderation. February 25, 2011 at 7:17 am“
My memories of Punk 1976 to present day, I still consider myself a punk.
I remember jumping about in my sitting room in 1977 when Pretty Vacant came on the TV, it was great.
In 1978 the Sex Pistols split and there were cries on “Punk is Dead” but as there is no single definition to the word punk, how could it be killed off and anyway, the Sex Pistols were never true Punk, they were a manufactured band and used as a cash cow.
By the early 80’s there was a massive hardcore punk following featuring bands such as GBH, Disorder and Chaos UK etc (youtube them). I remember going to a gig in 84/85 in a small community centre. There were 15 bands that played for free. To get in you had to bring a food donation which was given to the families of the miner’s strike here in the UK, the same bands that never copyright protected their music as they were against it, a true crime these days, the same bands that would sell their 7″ singles for half the recommended price as they didn’t want to see anyone getting fat on the back of them.
Mentioned above were P.I.L and B.A.D. these weren’t part of the true underground UK Punk movement, they tried to sell out bigger and bigger venues to make more and more money, the Punk scene I remember was never about money, it was giving to those in financially hard situations and times because the government weren’t doing it…. that was the TRUE punk and that’s the way I remember it.
I don’t believe Edupunk is dead for one minute. You have always said the name is unimportant, its the idea and concept that matters.
This is the end of one chapter and the next is about to begin. Sure, there will be many imitators but there will be an equal amount, if not more that will take the Edupunk ideas forward and I’m sorry Jim but I really can’t see you dropping Edupunk completely, its who you are, it’s who I am and its who MANY others are.
Pingback: Hello world! — Edupunk’s Not Dead | Smithereenz Edu-blog
I am sorry I have offended you so much to call me a “fuckface”. I have only wanted to challenge the concept of edupunk. I don’t feel I ever directed my commentary at you as a person only at the edupunk concept. I supported Leigh a while back for he is a friend and I believed he was making a good point about the cult of personality and the following you have created. Particularly, given the bravado (almost cult leader fashion) in which you conduct yourself online. I saw what he did in jest and with the same tongue in cheek humour you use. My guess is you probably don’t care, even though I see you as quite innovative, I now see you as a bully, calling a person fuckface in a public forum crosses the line for me. I have children and this is the kind of behavior I ask them to avoid. So, I will now avoid you. Be well… Peter
I can’t be doing with all this movement theology. The spirit of the thing seems to be the most important. If it’s no fun any more, if the thrill is gone, then the breakup makes sense.
Also, this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkdqCTcDkbc
Been on holiday and missed all this till that edupunk, erm, nice bloke, Dave Cormier pointed me at it. Two points come to mind: Jim can say this stuff because he has retained distance from it. Almost anyone else(shamefully myself included) would’ve ridden it to a career defining end. Not doing so means you don’t get the cash but you do get the integrity,so it’s absolutely within his right to say he’s had enough of it. Secondly, I think it demonstrates different audiences – I had no problem with Anya’s book because I figured wasn’t aimed at me really but a more general audience and is thus more journalistic in tone. She was a decent journalist in this respect and gavevdue credit to the ideas. That’s a good deal, and openness means she can take ideas and develop them as she sees fit, (and equally Jim can disagree with this). Anya’s treatment was a good deal more sympathetic than say a Blackboard Edupunk Plug-in ($2000 per year) would be, but that almost doesn’t matter, it’s an idea, and ideas don’t belong to anyone, which is what I think, Jim is really saying.
And Peter, don’t play the bully card, it ill becomes a troll.
Reminds me of the the apocryphal stories of the death of hippie-dom!
When did the movement, or the spirit of the movement sell-out? Has EDUPUNK jumped the shark? It is cool to be the early-adopter of a trend, and it is nearly as cool to be the “early-dropper” too. Our nomenclature, the word Edupunk, is certainly trendy (it will not likely survive), but the underlying issue remains substantial. One cannot be taken to task for forming relationships with those who understand and influence the issues (even those on the “wrong” side). You’ve got to go into the dungeon to slay the dragon. I do not fault people for noting that “Edupunk” has come of age, either. (Or that it’s less hipster-trendy-cool than it once was)
I just want to remind all you edupunks: YOU ARE STILL REAL! So now what?
Dear “Reverend” Groom [or whatever other aliases you have been employing to evade our extensive network of Pinkertons]:
While you may be done with Edupunk, she is not done with you. I bring to your attention, sir, the question of paternity and parental responsibilities. At our last count, the interwebs boasted at least 142 “Edupunkitos” – – your intellectual and existential spawn. (We are still tabulating the number of other, “offline” “victims” of your dalliance with self-organization, direct action, and other varieties of digital anarcho-syndicalism.) On behalf of these abandoned and languishing children, we have been contracted by your former inamorata [see above, nee “Edupunk”] to file at her behest, and at the behest of the teeming spawn of your brief dalliance, a class action suit.
In this suit, pursuant to Section 10, Article 13, Op Cit. Regulation 666 of the civil code of Ouachita Parish of the great state of Louisiana (former state motto, a la Huey Long, aka the Kingfisher: “Every man a king, no man wears a crown1”), we are seeking child support and various reparations for abandonment. You, sir, are in flagrante delicto igno of your paternal responsibilities!
You may rest assured, sir, or “Reverend,” or “educational technologist,” or whatever other nominative camouflage beneath and beyond which you seek to obscure your anti-capitalist, anti-bureaucratic, anti-hierarchical, and anti-authoritarian ambitions, yens, and stray daydreaming, we shall be relentless in our pursuit of justice. You may, sir, have watched various Hollywood productions known collectively under the moniker of “film noir,” cinematic testaments – – as you surely will recall – – to the power of nemesis. With the heartless defenestration of your young, nubile, and pneumatic ex-paramour (see above, nee “Edupunk”), you may be sure that you have pop-topped a can of nemesis worthy Mr. Bob Mitchum himself.
I am advised also to direct to this video deposition, submitted by your former companion (see above, nee “Edupunk): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHYOXyy1ToI
Thank you for your time. And, in closing, may we ask that, as you move on (“como la mariposa” as our Colombian partners phrase it – -and, yes, we do know people who know people), that you pause once-in-a-convenient while to gaze back upon your femme fatale, now wishing to be known simply as “Ozymandias” [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncxR5JKLVA8] and who can be observed, nightly, performing the “Cajun Two-Step Avec Gris Gris Comme Trappey’s Hot Sauce” at a local establishment of refinement and sophistication.
Yours in ectoplasmic faith,
Doctor Benway (J.D., PhD, CEO, etc.)
It was a good run, wasn’t it?
What you stood for, what you inspired.
EDUPUNK, you are a victim of your own success.
Corporate rock still sucks.
But when all you look for is ducks, that’s all you’re gonna see, baby.
I know you better than that.
It’s not about the ducks. It’s about a spirit, a spirit channeled through a mad reverend, through edglings, acolytes, and zen bass players with Canadian accents.
On one level, EDUPUNK is a category, and a dope one at that. It offers an ontological stance that mixes art, science, learning and becoming. There’s no secret formula. There’s nothing to buy. That’s just it. That’s what makes it tick; it’s the fuse. It’s popping the clutch and letting your songs rip.
EDUPUNK, you’re nobody’s slave and nobody’s master. EDUPUNK you are a muse, an offspring of the gods inspiring creation. What more could we want?
You wink at us and offer a shoulder to rest our head. You console us, you offer us hope and inspiration. Why? Because you know that the world needs people to unite us behind common causes that serve a greater good. EDUPUNK, you will always be of a higher power, the key to a good life, supported by friendship.
EDUPUNK, I know you. You will continue to encourage people to do their best. The work you have inspired will inspire others. The Internet is your cult, your museum. The Fab Four learned to Let It Be, as did the(ir) Replacements. As members of this tribe, we need to stay inspired to do the same. You can mock her, copy her, mix her, and even put her on Fox & Friends or The Academy Awards, but she will always remain true to the spirit of SHUT UP AND PLAY YOUR GUITAR.
I’ve attached myself to the “computers and writing” movement for a number of years, and in its early years there was the same sort of revolutionary, “punk” feel among a core group of practitioners. Eventually the internet became mainstream and MOOs and MUDs became Warcraft and Blackboard. All revolutions are eventually co-opted and commodified. I once gave a (terrible) presentation entitled, “Barbarians at the Gate,” circa 2000 where I tried (and failed) to explore this tendency.
I have nothing further to add, I just wanted to reference my own history with the concept and publicly acknowledge that I am now deadwood.
I’m saddened and disturbed to see the name calling go by without challenge or emotional support. Knowing Peter personally, and being in this forum, I feel the need to not be one who lets it go by. I know all too well the hurt and destruction that an unthinking communicate can generate, these name callings are direct and deliberate, a blight on our online record.
But, a reminder that here, in this forum, we only know each other online, despite the false sense of otherwise. We should all be experienced enough to know that online persona barely compares to the real person, and be generous in giving each other the benefit of the doubt, knowing that.
You had nothing to say when he called all kind of shit on me just a few weeks ago, calling me an EDUPUNK hypocrite and all kinds of other crap. Here’s the link if you forgot: http:///a-little-confused/comment-page-1/#comment-99890. And I love how he invokes his kids and bullying in the above link in this thread, how do you think my kids would feel about seeing me photoshopped as Hitler, Leigh? Was that bullying too? He seemed to be fine with that when I and others were the butt of your asinine joke. But it seems the highroad is working pretty well for you now. You’re both so highly selective in your moral outrage that it gets me dizzy. Either way, your righteous stand here in this little forum has been duly noted, and I hope you and Peter can find some way to transcend the horrors that is the open web, and all the abuse you have taken on as a result of it. As for me, bring on the blight.
I was shown the error of my ways, and apologized profusely for it. Using the Nazi image was ill conceived sketches for the Cult of Personality concept, certainly not meant as a direct insult, though I’ve come to understand how it was taken that way.
I see there is not much I can do to save this. Very sorry to see it come to this.
If this breakdown in trust, solidarity and friendship is ‘the reality of the open web’ then it sure is a lesson as you say. It is the first time I’ve experienced it in the 8 years I’ve been in it, and a lesson in how fragile those connections really are, and how we can’t really rely on them.
BTW, your link gave me no evidence of Peter calling you a hypocrite. Most of what he wrote was his quick attempts to take the heat out of that drama, and use it to backup his dismissal of Edupunk. Some of the record in that thread has been taken out, such as one person calling me harsh names, and I appreciate you taking that out.
Getting upset about mere name calling at this stage of the game seems like a belated concern.
And what’s the name we’re talking about here? Fuckface? That’s light years better than being called much worse. Personally, I’d much rather be called “Fuckface” than “social marketing guru” – or, worse still – “edupreneur.”
Those last two are pretty obscene.
I think those of us who abandon edupunk-dom should adopt the equally silly title: UNSTUDENTS. Just throwin’ it out there. One too many letters to write on your knuckles, unfortunately.
Pingback: Teaching Carnival 4.7 - ProfHacker - The Chronicle of Higher Education
Wait wait wait. Edupunk is a woman? Suddenly everything makes so much more sense.
inhale . . .
The time for Donna Summer has long passed, this is my blog—and nobody fucks with the bava in his own backyard, NOBODY!!!!
Here’s to Jim Groom, The Dude of UMW: