Talk:Elizabeth Mynatt

Birthday

Is the correct birthday December 7 or July 12? The article reports both. MaxVeers (talk) 00:55, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

It's July 12 and someone appears to have already fixed the article. Svoida (talk) 04:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Untrue statements by 72.74.248.236/Now known as user "No Oath"

To this anonymous user - i see that you keep adding content that is inflammatory and just untrue. In your revisions you even decided it was okay to change the title of news article to fit your narrative. What is the purpose of this? If you could please refrain from changing this article from the objective tone, it would be appreciated. Of course, if you have verified sources to back up your claims, then I would welcome the purposed changes to persist. Jesspater (talk) 12:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@No_Oath I have asked for a third opinion on this article to address the difference in opinion related to the objectivity of edits to the career section of this article. Jesspater (talk) 01:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Career

@No_OathI think it would be good to try to better understand the differences in opinion we are having on the subjectivity of this section of the page. Without citations about the process, maybe there should be an agreement that all of the context beyond the code itself should be removed?

I have looked for authentication for your additions and can't find anything. I would like to make this as civil as possible.

The oath is found here: https://www.khoury.northeastern.edu/about/mission-and-vision/ The article about purposing it does not mention compulsion: https://www.khoury.northeastern.edu/dean-mynatt-proposes-oath-for-computer-scientists-at-khoury-college-graduation/

I appreciate that we all have differences of opinions. However, if something can't be verified, I don't think it should be presented as factual. Jesspater (talk) 16:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no spoken or published or understood opt-out policy. Therefor the Dean is essentially using peer pressure (and the heightened feelings at graduation with parents often present) to enforce. The administration and Ms. Mynatt have been asked repeated in formal letters and Khoury College forums to elaborate and have declined to do so. Also they have declined to name an author or a formal process for consensus. The articles referenced by you above, do not answer these questions. Verify that there is an author, formal process and opt-out policy and I will acquiesce. Ms. Mynatt is supposed to be a scholar and academic. Why won't she and the college just do the proper work to build consensus? Do Dean's possess unilateral power over students? Is this not an abuse?! No Oath (talk) 17:39, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! I think that there are a quite a few assumptions in your response. My concern is the objectivity of the section. My suggestion is to remove all text after the statement of the oath existing to make this section focused and as objective as possible. It seems based on your response that there is a personal issue you have with Dean Mynatt and this oath that might be more appropriately handled offline. Jesspater (talk) 12:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

I also think that truncating the career article to the existence of the Oath without additional commentary would serve 2 critical purposes. 1) it feels like a respectable compromise and 2) is in line with Wikipedia's editing policy Wikipedia:Editing policy Jesspater (talk) 13:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

I do not accept your revisions as they are biased and incomplete to the point of being inaccurate. I can site an article written by Ms.Mynatt that states: "Modelled on the Hippocratic oath, this statement – which all of our students recite and adopt" (the misspelling of the word modeled is from the article not a typo on my part). This does not sound like "introduced" or "invited" or any other words euphemistically used to cover the fact that Ms.Mynatt has taken it upon herself to author the Oath and to enforce it without the representation of students, other faculty or any process of review. Additionally she has censored dissent over the Oath which I can and will cite. What kind of respectable college administrator does this? Name one. Additionally Ms. Mynatt's Oath is not anything like the Hippocratic Oath or the Oath of Engineers and to represent it as such is a blatant attempt to borrow credibility. I can't for the life of me understand why you are attempting to provide cover for Ms. Mynatt but I am happy to discuss further in a different forum. I don't like gumming-up Wikipedia over a this dispute but facts are facts. In this case the facts are complicated and Wikipedia is not a PR or propaganda tool for high-profile individuals. If you are truly interested in understanding and providing a complete and truthful account of the origin story, authorship and enforcement of the Oath, please suggest another forum. I'm fine with removing *everything* subjective about the Oath from Ms. Mynatt's page and creating a separate more detailed page about the Oath that can be referenced from Ms. Mynatt's page. There are many citations that can be made on that page to support the complete truth regarding the Oath. I will leave your revision for 48 hours then I will re-edit with citations. No Oath (talk) 14:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I am also happy to detail my personal experience with Ms. Mynatt in another forum. Things aren't always as they appear. No Oath (talk) 14:35, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

@No Oath, your personal experiences with Dr. Mynatt bear no matter to this page. I am not attempting to provide cover, I am trying to ensure the objectivity of this article as that is a core tenant of this platform. As you mentioned, if there is credible accounts of "censored dissent over the oath", please provide that. My understanding of the Oath is that it offers reflection on the impact computer science can have, and that as computer scientists (which I am one), we should take that seriously. I have pasted the oath below for reference. Again, this is the only appropriate forum for these discussions.

Today, I join the ranks of computer scientists worldwide. I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings. I will design and build computing systems that enhance the quality of daily life for individuals and for society. I will protect the dignity of users and others affected by computing systems, respecting the diversity of all cultures, and safeguarding against threats to health and safety.

I will respect the privacy and rights of all people and recognize the special role I have in judiciously collecting, storing and using their information, and creating systems that aim to shape their behavior. I will work for fair wages; honorably guarding my reputation and my colleagues in our work practices, while respecting the intellectual contributions of others. I will improve the public understanding of computing and its consequences. May I always act so, as to preserve the finest traditions of my field, and may I long experience the joy of inventing the future through my endeavors. Jesspater (talk) 15:14, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

In addition, their response to legitimate enquiries has been to censor those enquiries. Not very scholarly. No Oath (talk) 17:42, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

@No Oath - Since I haven't heard from you, I've made the update with the the compromise that I suggested. If you have an issue with it, please respond here so we can discuss - I don't think anyone wants an edit war. Thanks! Jesspater (talk) 14:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

See above thread. No Oath (talk) 14:12, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Citation 18, straight from Ms. Mynatt. No Oath (talk) 16:03, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/opinion/computer-science-students-must-be-taught-consider-social-effects No Oath (talk) 16:05, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Again, I'm happy to discuss in detail in another forum. Sooner or later we will both be kicked off for excessive editing and I for one would like to reach a consensus but this is not the place. If you are open to the facts and a fair discourse, I'm more than happy to engage, in another forum. Frankly I'm leaning toward creating a whole new page just for the Oath -- I could write a thesis on why I believe it is controversial. No Oath (talk) 16:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Jess Pater -- if there is an opt-out policy, accredited oversight or peer review, please point me to a citation. Again, I ask you to take the discussion offline. No Oath (talk) 22:37, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I do not want to take this discussion to another forum as I believe you have already tried to do by finding me on Facebook and sending me a direct message and then deleting it (not appropriate in my opinion). This is the only appropriate place for the discussion as it should be visible/public. I don't see how the discourse here is not "fair". I also don't see where facts have been discounted.

My understanding is Wikipedia is built on 5 core pillars, two of which are pertinent for this discussion: Wikipedia is a collection of specialized encyclopedias (directly calls out not being a soapbox) and should be written from a neutral point of view. I think this speaks directly to you point of you writing a thesis on why something is controversial. This is what motivated my question to you about leaving the Career section stating that students adopt and recite as that is mentioned in the Times Higher Education article that is linked. I believe that everything after is commentary that may or may not be grounded in a false assumption...that just because there is not a news article stating something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Unless you can point to justification that there is no opt out, that others haven't contributed that assumption can't be made. Jesspater (talk) 13:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Clearly you are not interested in truth or facts. Don't lecture on behave of wikipedia -- you don't work for them. Your edit is not neutral. I have offered discourse but you are rejecting it. I will continue to re-edit the page for accuracy until they kick me off but they will kick you off too. I thought you were an academic but I see you are just a biased hack. Good luck, it is you who have chosen not to discuss. I'm happy to bring all points to daylight -- you just want to continue to try to coerce and bully. What has become of today's academics? I guess rigor and critical thinking isn't the thing any more as you so aptly prove. No Oath (talk) 20:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

@No OathI am not trying to lecture, just trying to figure this out while upholding the community standards of this online space. I have continued to prompt discourse here, so I am not sure why you characterize this as a lack of discussion. I have also tried to keep this professional and not personal. I've repeatedly asked for the evidence that you point to which have not been hared here or in the actual article with the updates provided. I'm not sure how having a public and visible discussion is coercive or bullying, as that was never my intention. Jesspater (talk) 15:25, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Further, I simply feel that this isn't the forum for us to go back and forth and I doubt Wikipedia wants us to air a difference of opinion on their site this way. You have never addressed even one question I have posed on this issue. You ignore what I write and ask and just pursue your interest. Not very appropriate. No Oath (talk) 20:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

@No Oath I thought I had. What I was trying to convey many times is that, without substantiation, the article looses objectivity. Thus the compromise that I suggested that we truncate it where it states that the Oath exists without any commentary from both of our perspectives. Jesspater (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Further, you know there is no opt-out policy. You know there was no formal process with transparency and inclusion. You know that Ms. Mynatt holds no ethics accreditation and consulted no one who does. The truth is that she wrote it unilaterally from her POV and is making students recite it at graduation for her own gratification. These are the facts and you know them. Why do you persist in biasing the text? No Oath (talk) 20:47, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

@No Oath I am not sure why you think I know all of the things you stated about me or why you are trying to make this personal. I do not have insider knowledge as I do not work at Northeastern, I am not a student at Northeastern, nor do I have personal relationships with students at Northeastern. I do not feel that I am biasing any text in that I have asked several times that we compromise to what can be substantiated which is that the Oath exists and that it is recited at specific times which is part of public knowledge via published articles. Since I believe that we are at a total impasse, I have requested a third party review of the article, which includes this discussion space. Jesspater (talk) 15:34, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

One more thing. Ms. Mynatt said herself in her graduation speech last year that the Oath is not a pledge. That can be cited. No Oath (talk) 21:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

==There is a case at the DRN regarding this page.==

This message is to inform interested editors of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute related to this page. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. Any editors are welcome to add themselves as a party, and you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Jesspater (talk) 15:14, 12 December 2024 (UTC) (DRN Volunteer)