Talk:Diploma mill

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This Crime related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


Archives for this talk page: , (new)

Merging the articles: Diploma Mill and Academic Accreditation[edit]

Anyone agree? Because the information from Diploma mill could be reformatted to the section diploma mill in the Academic Accreditation.--Rationalzombie94 (talk) 02:15, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Mark it for duplication and I'll agree. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 13:02, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

About my revert[edit]

My reasoning behind my recent revert

If there's degrees being offered at some obscure university which many well established universities do not offer, this is sketchy. I'll be frank, if someone pays a large fortune of money on something and never bothers researching before making their purchase, I'd say they're gullible. It's unfortunate the individual got screwed over and a person should research significantly before making a huge purchase. It's bad that Diploma mills exist and the consumer has to take some responsibility because they are keeping these Diploma mills alive. If the consumer determines before paying that the Diploma mill is a scam, the mill will not receive any money to stay in business. That's my rational behind it.—CheeseburgerPlate Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 01:38, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Also my point was not entirely about "not being PC" I just couldn't fit this explanation into an edit summary. :P—CheeseburgerPlate Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 01:40, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Good post! My impression is really that there's two types of people who attend diploma mills... The gullible who are more or less duped or talked into it, and the people who are just as scummy as those who run the mills, and know they're just bying a fake degree so they can bullshit other people with it. Perhaps the sentence needs rebuilding to reflect that there's both victims of shysters and shyster customers who purchase degrees from diploma mills? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:44, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
I was thinking about quackery when I saw "gullible fools" and was reminded of this article where quackery is hard to spot and people who are fooled aren't necessarily stupid and don't deserve their treatment. So I see the phrase "gullible fools" and I think that it's not quite correct (since diploma mills can be tricky, sneaky, slick bastards) and of course, not politically correct either, but I think it's harmful to characterize those victimized by diploma mills as "gullible fools" or even "gullible". Of course, there are those who cheaply take advantage of diploma mills for cheap credentials, but that's another boat and I didn't file those people under gullible fools. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 01:51, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
That's a good article link. But basically I think we're in agreement here — we just need to be clear that there's both what are basically victims (be they victims of their own gullibility or not), and what I'd call knowing clients, i.e. people who know they want a fake degree (that can pass for a real one), just as much as a kid knows why they want a fake ID — to be able to use it to pass for shit they shouldn't actually pass for. We can easily make both the point that one can be taken in by these mills (which certainly work hard to seem legit), but that there's also people who know the mills are mills just as much as people who are out to score drugs know that their own dealer deals. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 02:01, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
This argument can be applied to a lot of scenarios: obvious scams vs sneaky scams. I suggest having a separate article on it because it's not just limited to diploma mills.—CheeseburgerPlate Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 02:22, 6 April 2017 (UTC)


Could the 'mills of god' quote be worked into the text somehow (as the diploma mills are the reverse).

And one doctorate is never questioned. Anna Livia (talk) 14:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

ITT Tech[edit]

With them crashing and burning spectacularly, would it be wise to include them in this article? Zero (talk - contributions) 16:01, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Was that recent(can't find the news) or like a couple years ago? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:20, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

RW Diploma mill[edit]

What would a RW diploma look like?

  • Advanced swearing
  • Annoying someone sufficiently to go on a two day LANCB holiday. (Double grade if yourself).
  • Having a row with 'the usual suspects/your own troll'

Any more? (talk) 18:40, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Atheist seminary. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 18:42, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Donate to the fundraiser, get a diploma. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 18:52, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Is RW atheist or 'assume nobody else is interested in your faith, so don't bother peddling it (unless it is sufficiently weird or interesting)'? Anna Livia (talk) 00:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Not a diploma mill[edit]

... but not a university/academic - this. Anna Livia (talk) 19:48, 25 April 2022 (UTC)