Fraud, libel, and academic uses of the internet

[Peter Giordano]

I am trying to structure the following as an acadmeic argument because I
do not want to be involved in flame wars - I firmly believe that the
questioning
of sources is vital on the internet and much of my current work revolves around
this issue - My error in getting into a strange sort of flame war were
pointed out
to me and I've tried to correct them

There were a few replies to my comments on the source of Puzo's the
Godfather -
Some favorable some not - As a courtesy to this list I took all my
responses offlist and
at least one of the more rude responses has sparked a very reasonable
conversation -
Somebody else in his response included yet another flame from the author whose
work I am researching

One would ask why an author would so violently object to having sources
checked - Isn't
that part of participating in academic dialogue?

Every comment I've made about the author's work I've backed up with facts
which can
be verified on this list:

If author x says y and a search on a database proves y to be an inaccurate
statement then
isn't that author committing fraud?  I do not believe I ever said that the
author in question
is committing fraud - I have said that if an author persists in making a
claim which is
demonstrated to be false then that is fraud

In all my discussions I have cited sources - And anybody on this list can
check those sources -
That's the point - What I find odd is that the more I deal in solid (at
least in my opinion)
material the more violent the responses seem to be - One could make a
supposition as
to why this is the case

You may not agree with my theories - And I readily admit that I responded
to some
of the issues in a superficially glib manner - However, it should be clear
from the
archive that I never cursed, swore at, or threatened anybody on this list

A major issue becomes - Does the author in question engage in flames for
profit? The
messages I see embedded in comments from people like John and Max indicate that
this is the case by the author in question's own admission - That will make
for interesting
case law when the lawyers settle in as apparently they are

I repeat:

I am not interesting in flaming any one and I am trying to keep this
discussion in
the realms described in the FAQ

Every comment I've made (including the most glib about the nature of books on
Amazon.com) is backed up with facts which anybody on this list can check

I never said the author in question is a fraud - I have said if x does y
then that
is fraud  - If my research proves me wrong I will readily admit it

Regarding lawyers: For the record, I did indeed invoke a lawyer when I was told
I was going to have my face ripped off - I had asked not to receive private
email
from the author in question and viewed the "private" email as the same thing
as crank calling

Regarding making contact with my employer: This is surreal but hardly a
threat -
Can you imagine how many times a day a college hears about things like this?
They've dealt with this before - My only objections are that on a personal
level it seems immoral to extend a conversation from a list to the real
world unless
there is a real threat of violence - Besides this list is archived and the
author's
output makes quite an impressive case - Am I embarrassed by a couple of my
postings?
You betcha - Does my employer need the hassle?  Who does?  But again the
extreme reaction of the author in question is very interesting

Finally, I firmly believe that the internet is a valuable tool for academic
communication
however the dangers of the internet include the difficultly verifying the
accuracy of
information - It's something we should all be concerned with

Peter Giordano
Williams College
Williamstown, MA