On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, Doug Henwood wrote:
> it came up that Baiman (who's not on the list) was having trouble raising
> funds for the trip. Mitofsky got snooty said something like, well, I guess
> if his department isn't paying then his motives may not be "academic."
That really seems like twisting the knife, since it seems as if AAPOR in general and Mitovsky in particular went out of their way to put financial burdens in Baiman's way. I'm sorry now I snipped this part, esp. the second paragraph:
<quote>
The fact that Ron and Steve did such a great job speaking and answering questions was important because the organizers of the seminar on whether the 2004 election was stolen stacked the deck against our side by having three speakers on the other side who they let speak after Ron and Steve spoke first. I was angry when I tried to make several comments to respond to the nonsense on the other side and was interrupted and prevented from finishing during the question and answer period.
It was also unfair that the entire conference fee was waived for Liddle who has contributed more sophistry (plausible sounding but fallacious argumentation) to the analysis of exit polling than any other person and who has received payment for her sophistry by Mitofsky, but Ron Baiman and I who have worked as unpaid volunteers and who have contributed valid work in this field were not helped, so that Ron was only able to attend the session that he spoke at.
<unquote>
Michael