Thursday, January 22, 2015

K in K.

Terry asked me to address K in K and her most recent submission to the page. (I am glad he didn't utter her name, as I'm still looking over my shoulder.) It came in yesterday but Terry has told me he will not be putting it up.

KinK (that couldn't be much better) was a regular at RYS and in the early days at CM. She is a well known academic blogger with an avid readership, and she also sent us posts for publication. (These were occasionally a bit more hyperbolic than her own writing, but oftentimes the stories were identical - BFFing with her students, etc.)

This same person, however, often asked us to take down her posts after the fact, most times claiming not to have sent them, even though IP addresses and email addresses (even her personal college one) matched. I corresponded with her several times over a few years, trying to reason with her, but it never amounted to much.

When she did her last post with CM, it had been several months since she'd asked to be "left alone." Fab or Leslie K asked me to verify she'd sent the thing and I used her school address to double check. Yes, she had. The piece was posted, it got some rough treatment (it was nutty - go figure), and she wrote CM to claim plagiarism. The last thing Fab wrote about it, I think, was to say if she claims she didn't write these things she sent to us, well then we're okay with that, and we'll just ignore material that comes from "her" in the future. I thought that was a good idea.

Her most recent submission to CM, which I've seen, is directly from her own page, and it's such a self-aggrandizing screed - and a take down of all those in the academy who have long tried to hold her back (out of sheer envy) - that it's probably best left in her journal.

So, despite the anticipation that KinK might be on these pages again, I'd say be careful what you wish for.


  1. As much as we loved kicking around ol' Katie, it's really not worth the GDM hassle. We love our GDM a lot more than KinK.

  2. Nothing's better than kink. Wait, which blog am I on?

  3. Those were some good times. Good times!

  4. She is a wonderful gift. I occasionally read the archives and smile. And then puke.

  5. Oh dear, I'm sure we're in trouble already. You said "K." That's enough.

  6. Still don't know what to make of her. On her own page, she sounds functional (maybe high-functioning is a better word?), ambitious (in a mostly good way), definitely self-absorbed, but also like someone who would be a productive, though undoubtedly also exasperating and exhausting, colleague, and probably a pretty good teacher to the majority of her students (although she definitely plays favorites, if she also chooses whipping boys, she doesn't write about it). I also suspect that her particular constellation of characteristics would occasion considerably less comment in a man, which makes me hesitant to criticize (though I think men who are quite as publicly unfiltered as she is are rare; it's the glimpse into the inner workings of her mind that is fascinating, and sometimes inspiring, and often also more than a bit horrifying).

    But the interactions between KinK and this page tip over into the disturbing range. I trust the various RGMs, and Cal's, accounts, and so can only conclude either that KinK has moments when she loses touch with reality, or that she has a very determined (and quite cyber-savvy) stalker/nemesis, probably within her own department. Occam's razor seems to suggest the first explanation, but, in fairness to her, I'm willing to consider the second, considerably less probable, one (and I guess, because I tend to assume the best of people, I'm leaving out a third, perhaps more plausible, explanation -- that she somehow derives pleasure from manipulating/tormenting CM mods).

    Whatever the actual explanation, ignoring submissions that purport to come from her sounds like the smart approach to me (and the one that is kindest to and most protective of all parties involved regardless of what's going on).

    Thanks for dealing with this, thinking it through, and explaining it to the rest of us, Cal and Terry. Saving wear and tear on the RGM strikes me as another very good reason for coming up with a routine response to this ongoing situation that can be invoked without spending too much energy on the periodic, and apparently inevitable, eruptions.

    1. That's all very well said. I discussed this with Cal one day, and we decided that there were truly three personalities. There is the real academic. There is the pseudonymous writer who runs the blog. And then of course there is kink. Cal, who has done the most work on this, has no doubt that all three are the same person. But of course there are all kinds of reasons why kink might continue a very loose affiliation with this page. But smarter people than me have made a wise decision, I think, to simply ignore any new posts that are generated. Even with double checking the origin of these, we been accused of plagiarism from her pseudonymous site. So we are out of the kinky business.

  7. I like to sit back and watch crazy unfold, but that level of crazy shouldn't be something the mods have to deal with. While it's amusing to us, they bear the brunt of the ire on the part of KinK.

  8. I prefer The Kinks to the KinK.
    Maybe her theme tune could be "Days", as the ones she gave us do seem unforgettable.

    1. In the current context, your mention of the band caused me to associate to "Paranoia, the destroyer." The mention of "Days" caused an association to lyrics in another Kinks song:

      Live life, day to day,
      Seems so passe.
      Everything you hear and say,
      Just another cliche.
      Like an actor on a movie screen,
      Living out someone else's dream.
      Living out a total misconception,
      Reality, a false perception.

  9. My initial thought was to publish it - actually, I suggested to the RGM that he withhold it until we posted enough to satisfy him. Now I think it's even better not to post K's email. At this point, it couldn't live up to what we imagine it to be.

  10. Yeah, please do publish it. It's got to be better than the mascots, and the ensuing discussion (or something like that) may well be interesting.