[Vision2020] And the Hits Just keep On Coming . . .

[Andreas Schou]

Incidentally, I did actually do a self-report, as suggested. I
explained the situation as follows: I am accused of paraphrasing a
secondary source in a private email. I think that's a fair summation
of what I'm accused of -- right? In any case, the response I received
used the word "bizarre." This corresponds fairly well with what I
thought to begin with*.

The issue is, as far as I'm concerned, settled. Any threatened report
-- and I don't think threat was explicit so much as clearly replied --
that Dr. Harkins could've made would, as I suspected, have no effect.
While I'm all warm and fuzzy about the Viz's academics rushing to my
defense, his particular threat no more effect than if he had
threatened to set his army of killer bees on me or disintegrate my car
with his ray gun.

He doesn't have an army of killer bees, he doesn't have a ray gun, and
as a professor emeritus, he is entitled to the university's thanks and
a pension, not to dictate the policies of the law school. Even taking
the most uncharitable view of what Dr. Harkins said, he was making
threats he had no means of carrying out. Can we chalk this up to an
overheated political argument and move on?

-- ACS

* I don't think the Dean of Students would appreciate me interposing
himself between myself and my detractors. However, in the interest of
getting this whole meta-discussion ended, anyone who disputes my
characterization of my actions can make a less charitable report at
richard at uidaho.edu.