outcome of complaint by jiscmail at the request of ken friedman

Subscriber complaint

Ken Friedman complaint against Jonathan Bishop on the PHD-DESIGN JiscMail list

1

Subscriber complaint Ken Friedman complaint against Jonathan Bishop on the PHD-DESIGN JiscMail list

Complaint PHD-DESIGN list subscriber Ken Friedman (KF) has made the following complaint about PHD-DESIGN list

subscriber, Jonathan Bishop (JB).

Part 1: KF says that JB has “repeated attacks on me and others on the PHD-DESIGN list with false claims,

derogatory comments, and personal attacks that he considers to be humorous.”

Part 2: “Over the past couple of years, I have written several private letters to Mr. Bishop in which I requested

that he stop these attacks, I stated that the next time he attacks me without reason, I would file a formal

complaint. This took place today. I wrote to him repeating the warning once again. Within a few minutes of my

request, he posted a new note with a libellous comment about me in response to a list member whose post did

not quote or mention me in any way.”

KF has also provided copies of off list correspondence between himself and JB from September 2015

Facts found List Activity

JiscMail Helpline has extracted all of the messages posted by JB on the PHD-DESIGN list (JiscMail archive and

gmane.org). JB has made 38 posts to the PHD-DESIGN list, using the email addresses:

[email protected], [email protected], and [email protected]

Summary of posts made:

» JB has posted some on-topic academic debate to PHD-DESIGN, including debates with KF:

18/10/2014 18:01, Re: Conversation and Debate in Research Communities JB to subscriber “I agree with Jeremy, Many of the people on this list are in the area of human computer interaction, so it would not be problematic to discuss issues related to those which often touch on design, such as interaction design and user-interface design.” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;f691ac4b.1410 16/06/2015 20:19 Re: No need to use "was" titles for new threads

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;f691ac4b.1410



2

JB to KF “Ken, I disagree. As someone who uses nested email options on Gmail and Outlook it causes great problems if the email has the same title yet different forked conversations. Email has changed since the PHD-DESIGN group was formed, and so the way the group is conducted should also change.” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;dfeac0a4.1506.

» KF has posted messages to PHD-DESIGN which appear on-topic and relevant:

22/05/2015 12:42, She Ji CFP in .pdf format KF posts to the list: Dear Friends,Thanks so much for the kind messages I have been getting on the launch of the new journal. There

were several requests for a .pdf version. You will find attached a .pdf version of the CFP for 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design,

Economics, and Innovation.The .pdf also shows you our first cover. https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;3ec62be3.1505

» JB has posted abusive (name-calling) messages to PHD-DESIGN, specifically aimed at KF, or posted to others

about KF, JB has challenged KF’s qualifications, and JB has posted to “show KF to be a hypocrite”.

KF’s preceding contributions have been have been relevant and KF’s response (to the example messages

below) has been to ignore the comments made by JB:

19/10/2014 00:05, Re: conversation rules, games and positions JB to another subscriber: “Just ignore Ken - he is a type of troll called a 'Big Man'” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;44d476d4.1410 07/11/2014 21:38, Re: What is evidence in design and design research? JB to KF “Is that why you have an honorary DSc Ken and not a real one?” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;1f50ff58.1411 22/05/2015 20:07, Re: She Ji CFP in .pdf format JB to another subscriber “Being an Internet trolling expert I take exception to Ken acting like a Big Man who assumes a de facto council over anything posted on this list. He treats this list as if he is the leader and everyone must follow him. When he spread rumours about a conference of a colleague's being fake when it was not, I have given more attention to his posts than I otherwise would. Ken's post are double standard. He will criticise people for doing things he then does himself. For instance there are numerous posts where he promotes his own academic works, yet he feels inclined to behave in a way to others that resembles malicious falsehood. So unless Ken changes, and starts to respect the integrity of other academics, then when he acts in a way I perceive as biased I will highlight that.” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;6cafd37e.1505 23/05/2015 19:31, Re: She Ji CFP in .pdf format JB to another subscriber “I was not suggesting anything about Elsevier other than they are profit making, so that shows Ken Friedman to be a hypocrite. Ken Friedman says he opposes profit-making academic ventures, but then has his journal published by a for-profit company.” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;45b245e3.1505 03/09/2015 11:23, re: Don' be too grumpy JB to the list “This list is like being on a community council committee. I wish the elders like Ken Friedman and Filippo Salustri would stop going on about rules and allow conversation to flow.” http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.hci.phd-design/22500 14/09/2015 10:57, Re: can machines design? JB to another subscriber “As Ken will tell you, I have such a high opinion of myself I consider myself my own genus! ;-)” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;c805c090.1509

» There are messages posted to PHD-DESIGN where JB has asked a question of KF, KF has responded

providing a constructive and informative answer:

22/05/2015 17:13, Re: She Ji CFP in .pdf format

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;dfeac0a4.1506

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;3ec62be3.1505

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;44d476d4.1410

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;1f50ff58.1411

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;6cafd37e.1505

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;45b245e3.1505

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.hci.phd-design/22500

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;c805c090.1509



3

JB to KF “Ken, Why are you always using this list to promote your efforts and yet to criticise those of others? It is as if you think you have more right to publicity than others in the same field as you. How do we know your journal is not a fake one? You seem to think anyone who posts a CFP that isn't for a publication you have heard of is fake. I haven't heard of your journal before so how can I know it's not fake?” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;d9acb6ae.1505 22/05/2015 19:59, Re: She Ji CFP in .pdf format KF to JB “Mr Bishop, My warning notes to the list always involve profit-making enterprises where predatory publishers and conferences attempt to make money off unsuspecting researchers. In the case of predatory publishers, all are identified on Jeffrey Beall’s list of predatory publishers. I welcome and support projects by legitimate not-for-profit organisations, universities, and serious publishers. You have never seen me criticise these.” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;c5260224.1505

» JB has posted messages to PHD-DESIGN where he abuses (name-calling), and provokes 2 other subscribers

(Nicolai Steino and Filippo Salustri):

23/05/2015 17:51, Re: She Ji CFP in .pdf format JB to Nicolai (sharing an article he wrote about 2 other subscribers, accusing them of trolling): “I think you should declare your conflict of interest Nicolai: http://news.crocels.com/news/5225/filippo-salustri-nicolai-steino-trolling/” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;e3aecc18.1505 23/05/2015 21:02, Re: She Ji CFP in .pdf format JB to another subscriber “You, Filippo Salustri, are essentially a cyber-terrorist” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;d602b923.1505

Off-list communication between KF and JB (copies received by Helpline)

JiscMail Helpline has received and reviewed correspondence between JB and KF from 3 September 2015. KF

contacted JB (off list) in response to the “Don’t be too grumpy” message JB posted to the list in September, it

was also copied to the list owners.

In this message: KF describes how he sees JB’s behaviour towards him “you use every opportunity you can find to

take a whack at me….You like Don. You don’t like Fil and me” and JB confirms this observation “You and Fil are

both “Guard Bees” – you bite the newbies because you do not have the control you once had…..P.S. Yes I like

Don. He earned all his qualifications. He did not need them awarded on a honorary basis.”

KF highlights JB’s behaviour, but there appears to be no direct request from KF in this exchange for it to stop.

JiscMail Helpline has received copies of (off list) additional emails about the “Don’t be too grumpy” thread

exchanged between KF and JB on 14 September 2015, in one message timestamped 11:57 KF states “if you

publish another gratuitous personal attack on me. I will make a formal complaint to the list owners and to JISC.

Stop now” This request is made after JB posted to the “Re: can machines design?” thread about KF (which he did

at 10:57)

KF contacted JB (off list) in response to the “Re: can machines design?” message JB posted to the list in September,

it was also copied to the list owners. KF challenges JB’s message, he believes JB is attributing a quote to him, when

he’s never said anything of the sort (which KF believes amounts to libel). JB’s response is to tell the complainant

to lighten up, that his remark on the list was a joke.

KF does not make an explicit request for JB to stop, but refers to previous correspondence (dated 14 September

2015) which does.

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;d9acb6ae.1505

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;c5260224.1505

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;e3aecc18.1505

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;d602b923.1505



4

Interpretation of facts Part 1: JB has “repeated attacks on me and others on the PHD-DESIGN list with false claims, derogatory

comments, and personal attacks that he considers to be humorous.”

There is evidence to support KF’s claim, that JB attacks him, these attacks appear to be deliberate and

unprovoked, all of which is unacceptable on any JiscMail list.

KF’s reaction to these remarks has been exemplary: either ignoring them, or responding to provide a

constructive and informative response.

JB’s fixation on KF’s honorary degree (off list and on list) is excessive and unnecessary.

JB’s post on the thread “Re: can machines design?” made on 14 September 2015 “as ken will tell you” – attributes

a comment to KF which he (KF) has never made, and which KF considers to be libel. If this is upheld this could

create liability for the JiscMail service.

JB’s justification for his remark about KF on the “Re: can machines design?” as a joke, is inexcusable. Based on

the messages JB has posted to the PHD-DESIGN list about KF, there doesn’t appear to be a relationship between

KF and JB where they might joke together. As the message was posted to a mailing list with a public archive, and

the person it was about did not consider it to be a joke, it was likely to provoke a reaction from the subject of the

message.

JiscMail has reviewed the complaint against JiscMail service policies

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and after reviewing and evaluating the facts, the following

service policies have been breached by JB:

» #3 ethics: “We expect your conduct when using JiscMail to be legal and honest and we will take action

against anyone whose activities are found to violate this request… When using JiscMail you are not

permitted to:...Deliberately cause JiscMail systems, services or subscriber accounts to be interrupted.” JB’s

post to the list “Re: can machines design?” made on 14 September 2015 attributes a comment to KF, which

KF never made. KF considers this to be libellous, and this could create liability for the JiscMail service

» #5 content of messages: “Sending messages to JiscMail lists is a matter of common sense, use your own

sense of what is appropriate to guide your conduct without engaging in unreasonable behaviour or

disrupting the general flow of discussion on a list (see Section 3: Ethics). You are responsible for the content

of the message(s) you post to JiscMail lists, they should be courteous and relevant to the list topic. “

JB has engaged in unreasonable behaviour towards KF on the PHD-DESIGN list. The messages he has posted

disrupt the flow of discussion on PHD-DESIGN, they are not courteous and not relevant to the list topic.

» #7 Mailing list etiquette: “Ensure messages are on-topic and appropriate for the list…Be nice (See Section 3:

Ethics).”

JB has posed messages to the PHD-DESIGN list which are off topic, and inappropriate. JB has posted

messages which are abusive (name calling), which goes against JiscMail Mailing list etiquette.

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/#3





5

» #11 Violating this policy: “If you suspect that a JiscMail user has violated this policy - contact the JiscMail

helpline as soon as possible by emailing [email protected] or telephoning 0203 006 6076. The decision

on what action to take will be made by JiscMail on a case by case basis and will often depend on whether the

infringement was innocent, inadvertent or intentional. The decision whether to take action, and if so, which

action, is at JiscMail’s discretion. Abusive or threatening messages sent to any JiscMail list, or to JiscMail

Helpline staff will be treated as a violation of this policy.”

JiscMail Helpline believe that the abusive messages posted to the PHD-DESIGN list by JB were done so

intentionally, and to provoke a response from KF.

Part 2: “Over the past couple of years, I have written several private letters to Mr. Bishop in which I

requested that he stop these attacks, I stated that the next time he attacks me without reason, I would file

a formal complaint. This took place today. I wrote to him repeating the warning once again. Within a few

minutes of my request, he posted a new note with a libellous comment about me in response to a list

member whose post did not quote or mention me in any way.”

In the off-list correspondence provided by KF, there is a request from KF for JB to stop, however the timestamps

on those exchanges shared with the helpline are after JB posts to the “Re: can machines design?” thread on 14

September 2015. Therefore it cannot be used to demonstrate that JB has acted after a request was made to

desist. KF makes references to previous contact (it is assumed that this is prior to September 2015), but KF no

longer has copies of these.

Outcomes As JiscMail service polices have been breached, the first course of action would be for the list owner to issue a

warning to the subscriber.

However, as JiscMail Helpline and the list owner of PHD-DESIGN have both issued warnings to JB, then the next

stage would be for the list owner to either suspend the subscriber for a period of time, or permanently remove

them from their list.

Independently of this complaint, the list owner permanently removed JB’s subscription from PHD-DESIGN,

therefore there is no further action to be taken.

Complaint investigated & reviewed by: Lisa Vincent JiscMail operations manager

Date 13/10/2015

Investigation reviewed by:

Carl Vincent Head of customer contact centre

Date 13/10/2015

Copies to: Ken Friedman (complainant), Jonathan Bishop (subject of complaint), David Durling (list owner), Ken Russell (list owner)

mailto:[email protected]



6

Appendix Timeline of posts (& off list contact) from 2-3 and 14 September 2015

02/09/2015

KF posts to PHD-DESIGN list 02/09/2015

02/09/2015 20:44, Don't be too grumpy “Dear Don, Come on, now. I stopped. The last post was merely to thank Terry for sending the evidence I requested..Don't be too grumpy.” https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;4bec34ef.1509

03/09/2015 10:23 JB posts to PHD-DESIGN list

On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 10:23:24 +0100, Jonathan Bishop <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: This list is like being on a community council committee. I wish the elders like Ken Friedman and Filippo Salustri would stop going on about rules and allow conversation to flow. We are in the age of threaded emails. If you two are not willing to respect technology has moved on then maybe you should move on! This list is for discussing design, not discussion how one should discuss design!

03/09/2015 12:21 KF contacts JB off list

On 3 September 2015 at 12:21, Ken Friedman <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: Freeman Bishop, If you plan to enter the fray, be clear about who said what. Don's note that raised the question of rules and Don proposed a new rule. The first comment about rules came from Don, not from me or from Fil. If you want to allow the conversation to flow, then I suggest you let the matter drop when everyone else does. Ken

03/09/2015 13:37 JB responds to KF

On 2015Sep03, at 13:37, Jonathan Bishop <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] wrote: Don is an elder as well - I did say "like"

03/09/2015 13:44 KF responds to JB

From: Ken Friedman <[email protected]> Subject: No, you pointedly took a whack at me and at Fil Date: 2015 Sep3 13:44:57 CEST To: [email protected] Freeman, No, you pointedly took a whack at me and at Fil. Fil did not participate in the discussion of rules. You like Don. You don’t like Fil and me. So you named us, even when Fil played no part in the thread. When someone launches a thread and you criticise the thread, you ought properly to address the person who launches the thread. I am not criticising Don. He said what he said, and it is his privilege to do so. I am pointing out that you use every opportunity you can find to take a whack at me. Ken

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=PHD-DESIGN;4bec34ef.1509



7

03/09/2015 17:03 JB responds to KF

On 2015Sep03, at 17:03, Jonathan Bishop <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected] wrote: Ken, You and Fil are both "Guard Bees" - you bite the newbies because you do not have the control you once had. You do not like that new people have joined the group and that this don't work the way you want any longer. You should read my 2007 paper on increasing participation in online communities, where it describes how elders can play a more helpful role than you and Fil do. Regards, Jonathan P.S. Yes I like Don. He earned all his qualifications. He did not need them awarded on a honorary basis.

03/09/2015 17:49 KF responds to JB

From: Ken Friedman <[email protected] Subject: Send me the paper and I will read it Date: 2015 Sep3 17:49:11 CEST To: [email protected] Jonathan, Send me your paper and I will read it. But don’t be silly about “guard bees” and my role in the list. I helped to found the list and I have played a welcoming role for many of the 2,700 subscribers who have joined the list over the past two decades. The fact that I have my own views is a second issue. I don’t know why you are so bugged by my honorary degree. Don ALSO holds a couple of honorary degrees, one from Delft, one from Padua. Like Don, I earned my regular degrees. I hold a regular PhD, just like Don’s regular PhD. You may be misreading my sig. The (hc) applies only to the DSc. A comma separates my ordinary PhD from the DSc (hc). But Fil had NOTHING to do with the thread for which you criticised him. Don did and I did. Your criticism of Fil was unjustified in this case, and if you were fair, you would have named Don as one of the guilty elders. He started the thread. Go ahead and send me your article so I can read it. Yours,Ken

14/09/2015

In the email exchanges [A] is in response to “Re: Can machines design” and [B] is in response to “Re: Don’t

be so grumpy”

14/09/2015 10:57 JB posts to PHD-DESIGN [A]

Subject: Re: can machines design? From: Jonathan Bishop <[email protected]> Reply-To: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 10:57:48 +0100 Carlos, As Ken will tell you, I have such a high opinion of myself I consider myself my own genus! ;-) If I were carrying a gene that was essential to the survival of the human race, but I slipped in the bathroom because the building's designers had not listened to Don about the problems with hand drying, then by me individually becoming extinct the human race would also! Regards, Jonathan



8

On Monday, 14 September 2015, Carlos Pires <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2015-09-14 11:42, Jonathan Bishop wrote: >> survival to do so, then one has been selected for extinction. That is > "One" does not get extinct: one dies; species get extinct. > In your example, the inability to open doors will only lead to extinction > if it prevents individuals to reproduce. > -- > Best regards, > ================================== > [email protected] > [email protected]

14/09/2015 11:57 KF emails JB [B]

Jonathan, There was no need for your gratuitous complaint about me. In fact, there was no need for you to repost my post to Don. You yourself are the cause of reposting the post that you claim offends the rules and requirements. The fact remains that there is no “rule” on number of posts nor requirements on length. It’s voluntary, and in some cases, all of us have ignored it, including yourself and Don. In this case, Don mistakenly posted a private note to the list that he had intended to send me. I answered to acknowledge his note and to say that I agree. You could simply have replied to Don’s comments on evolution without reposting a post that he did not intend to publish — and without reposting my response. Jonathan, I am growing tired of your needless attacks on me. Based on the content of your note to Don, there was no need to repost my note and there was no need to criticise me.

14/09/2015 12:20 JB to KF [B]

On 2015Sep14, at 12:20, Jonathan Bishop <[email protected] > wrote: Ken, If the cap fits wear it! It is part of my personality to be against those assuming authority. On a design list you don't get creativity by creating arbitrary rules. You and Fil have disrupted many a thread by referring to people only being allowed emails of a certain length and frequency. I did not disrupt any thread with my postscript, I was merely pointing out in a way most on the list wouldn't notice about how two of the participants in that thread were hypocritically breaking the rules they try to enforce on others. The reason I quoted your note to Don, was because my message was refuting it. Evolution and neurology are two areas of special interest of mine. Regards, Jonathan

14/09/2015 12:31 KF to JB [B]

From: Ken Friedman <[email protected] Subject: This is incorrect Date: 2015 Sep14 12:31:03 CEST



9

To: [email protected] Cc: David Durling <[email protected], Keith Newcastle Russell <[email protected] On Monday, 14 September 2015, Ken Friedman <[email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]'); wrote: Jonathan. I have never interrupted a thread by creating rules of any kind. I have not proposed numbers of replies or length — this was Don Norman’s proposal. I agreed to try Don’s suggestion, and I have referred to it with respect to my own posts. I have never criticised anyone else on this issue, nor interrupted a thread. It’s time for you to review the list archives. It is your right to like Don and it is your right to dislike me. It is not your right to criticise me for a proposal that Don brought to the list, and it is not your right to blame me for doing something that I have not done. Ken

14/09/2015 12:34 JB to KF [B]

On 2015 Sep14, at 12:34, Jonathan Bishop <[email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]'); wrote: Ken, Clearly you have done it else the cap would not even have been visible so as to fit! I was not a member of the list when the rule was created, but am strongly of the view it is redundant today. Jonathan

14/09/2015 12:47 KF to JB [B]

From: Ken Friedman <[email protected] Subject: Show me where I wrote this Date: 2015 Sep14 12:47:00 CEST To: [email protected] Cc: David Durling <[email protected], Keith Newcastle Russell <[email protected] On Monday, 14 September 2015, Ken Friedman <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected] wrote: Jonathan, You were a member of the list when Don proposed it. Before this, we all agreed that all debate at any length was permissible, no matter how many replies and no matter how long. If you check the list archive, you will see that I wrote this on many occasions. The reason I am irritated with you recent attacks is not that the cap fits, but that I dislike being brought gratuitously into any thread that I choose to leave or to avoid. If you can find a point where I have called on other list members to stop posting because of a supposed reply limit or length limit, send me the link. You will not find such a post from me. (You may find a post or two in which I have applied this to myself, or discussed Don’s proposals.) I have not done this, either recently or before you joined the list. There is no way to provide proof of something that did not happen except by going through all my posts to the list to find that there is no such post. Since you claim that you have read posts in which I made these kinds of demands after you joined the list, please find a few examples of the posts in which you claim that I have complained about other people for posting too many replies or posting replies at too great a length. Ken



10

14/09/2015 13:02 KF responds to JB [A]

From: Ken Friedman <[email protected] Subject: This Libel Must Stop Date: 2015 Sep14 13:02:53 CEST To: [email protected] Cc: David Durling <[email protected], Keith Newcastle Russell <[email protected] Mr. Bishop, You continue gratuitously to involve me in threads where I have no part and you continue to write malicious comments about me. Your latest post, below, is a case of libel. Libel as defined under law is the act of publishing a false statement that causes people to have a bad opinion of someone. I have never written nor stated that you — Jonathan Bishop — have "such a high opinion of myself [yourself] I [you] consider myself [yourself] my [your] own genus.” To be precise, I have never written that “Jonathan Bishop has such a high opinion of himself that he considers himself his own genus.” Nor have I ever written anything remotely like this. In posting this statement to the list while falsely attributing it to me, you are attempting to place me in contempt before other members of the list. While several of your past posts have been removed from the list archive, 37 posts seem to remain accessible. Many of these show repeated gratuitous attacks on me. This demonstrates an inappropriate pattern on your part to malign me. In addition, I have private correspondence in which you falsely accuse me of making statements to the list that I have not made. In essence, because you (Jonathan Bishop) believe that I have written things I did not write, you feel justified in repeated attacks on my name and reputation. As I wrote to you earlier, if you made another gratuitous attack on me, I would make a formal complaint to the list owners and to JISC. I am starting this process now. I will request that formal action be taken to bring this to a stop. Ken Friedman Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia

14/09/2015 13:09 JB to KF [B]

On 2015 Sep 14, at 13:09, Jonathan Bishop <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected] wrote: Ken, It was not apparent to me you were not wanting to participate in that thread. You wrote a very long email trying to describe evolution, and I wrote a reply to a subsequent email in the thread explaining it in a few short paragraphs. I use Gmail, and so each email in a thread is equal. Most platforms have threaded messaging these days to group related messages together. If one does not like long emails one should either skim read or ignore. I do not have the time at present to go through all the emails. But my research assistant the other day was going through the PHD-DESIGN and other JISCMail archives to find all the critical emails directed at me, so I could ask them to do it. Regards, Jonathan



11

14/09/2015 13:11 JB responds to KF [A]

On 2015Sep14, at 13:11, Jonathan Bishop <[email protected] < wrote: Ken, That was a joke! Jonathan

14/09/2015 14:38 KF to JB [B]

Subject: I said clearly that I was leaving the thread. Date: 2015 Sep14 14:38:49 CEST To: [email protected] Cc: David Durling <[email protected], Keith Newcastle Russell <[email protected] Jonathan, In the reply that you gratuitously reposted — and then complained about! — I wrote, "I better stop while I am still well positioned on the family tree.” That is where I said that I was leaving the thread. Gmail has to do with this ... You were responding to Don, not to me. I had nothing to do with your response to Don. Moreover, you wrote an irrelevant aside about “rules” and required length that also had nothing to do with me. This had nothing to do with evolution. If your research assistant or anyone else can find the comments you claim I have made, send the link to where I wrote it on the list. Please be sure that you are looking at what I wrote, and not quoted material from someone else. Ken


From: Ken Friedman <[email protected] Subject: Libel is No Joke Date: 2015 Sep14 15:15:41 CEST To: [email protected] Cc: David Durling <[email protected], Keith Newcastle Russell <[email protected] Jonathan, All you are saying here is that you know that I never wrote anything of this kind. In this statement, you admit that you know I did not write this. It does not change the fact that you posted to the list the claim that I wrote something that your know I did not write. You knowingly published a false statement with the purpose of causing others to have a bad opinion of me. You may think this was a joke. It is not. It is the explicit definition of libel. It sometimes happens that friends make jokes about each other, but you are not my friend. Everything you have ever said about me is antagonist, often harsh, and sometimes false. You have repeatedly made comments against me even when these comments were irrelevant to thread at hand. Your comment to Carlos was irrelevant to the thread at hand. Carlos did not mention me in his post, and I had nothing to do with the exchange between you and Carlos. You chose to libel me with no reason whatsoever beyond your personal dislike for me — and your own, personal feeling that I have assumed some kind of authority on the list. You justify your feelings based on the mistaken belief that I have published or proposed list rules on the number of replies in a thread and the length of such replies. I have not done so. If I had done so, that would be the occasion for a debate, not an occasion for libel. Before you published this latest attack, I wrote, "If you publish another gratuitous personal attack on me, I will make a formal complaint to the list owners and to JISC.” I am taking appropriate action. Ken


On 2015Sep14, at 16:33, Jonathan Bishop <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected] wrote: Ken,



12

Get a sense of humour. Most people reading that would interpret as it was intended. People with a sense of humour would have seen the joke, which was more to do with my self-deprecating awareness of my sense of self-importance. I'm sure you have felt this about me, and as the rest of the list know we don't see eye to eye they would have seen the funny side. Regards, Jonathan


From: Ken Friedman <[email protected] Subject: No, Jonathan Date: 2015 Sep14 17:02:32 CEST To: [email protected] Cc: David Durling <[email protected], Keith Newcastle Russell <[email protected] No, Jonathan, I haven’t felt this about you. I am tired of your repeated personal attacks on me. You had a chance to stop this long ago. I have on several occasions requested that you stop attacking me. Had you done so, that would have been the end of it. The strict fact is that you have published a false statement, attributing this to me for the purpose of diminishing my reputation. As I wrote earlier, I am making a formal complaint. Ken


On 2015Sep14, at 17:12, Jonathan Bishop <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected] wrote:

Ken,

You need to lighten up. There was no malicious intent in that message, and most reasonable people would not have taken that email the

way you have.

Jonathan


From: Ken Friedman <[email protected] Subject: Enough Date: 2015 Sep14 17:42:08 CEST To: [email protected] Cc: David Durling <[email protected], Keith Newcastle Russell <[email protected] Jonathan, On numerous occasions, I have requested that you stopping attacking me when I have not been part of a thread, and I have requested that you leave me alone. On numerous occasions, you have ignored this request, attacking me as a person, making ridiculous critiques of things I have not said or done, criticising me for things that others have done. You have attacked me for placing my degrees and fellowship status in my sig, even though you do the same. You have attacked me for holding an honorary doctorate while falsely claiming that I use my honorary doctorate because I do not have an earned PhD. You have



13

called me a hypocrite, claiming that I failed to abide by standards that I have never proclaimed. You have accused me of being a “troll,” a “lolcow,” and a “big man.” This is your opinion, so it is neither false nor true. It is without question defamatory. Today, I asked you to stop, and I stated that if you once again attack me gratuitously, it would be cause for formal action. Now you tell me to “get a sense of humour” and tell me I “need to lighten up.” You should have understood that enough was enough when I wrote to you this afternoon. If you had had the decency to apologise with a promise to stop, you might have had my sympathy. A promise to leave me alone and a promise to post no more irrelevant and gratuitous attacks with a copy to the list owners would have been worth considering. The list archive shows that you have written 37 posts to the list from email addresses with your name in them. Of these, 20 either address me directly, complain about me, or accuse me of some flaw, whether or not I have done what you accuse me of. Today, I requested yet again that you stop. You attacked me again following this specific request to stop. To do this and then to tell me that this is somehow my fault because I lack a sense of humour is unacceptable. Much of my life, I have observed that bullies excuse their bad behaviour by claiming that their nastiness is a joke. They blame the victims of their bullying by saying they should lighten up and get a sense of humour. It’s enough, Jonathan. The list archives documents your behaviour. I have put forward a formal complaint to the list owners and to JISC. They can read the archives and decide the appropriate action. Ken

outcome of complaint by jiscmail at the request of ken friedman

Documents