Friday, December 16th 2005

posted @ 1:17 pm in [ ]

As you doubtless already know, I was dooced this week–that is, I was fired because of my blog–from DeVry University in Westminster, Colorado. Indeed, this very text. Here are the Cliff Notes on the affair from my point of view. Some of you have seen part of this already.

First, here’s what happened:

I got called into the Academic Dean’s office late Monday morning. The Human Resources person who hired me joined us. She said they had become aware of my blog, and that I had made disparaging comments about DeVry and about its students on the blog, and that because of that, I was being let go. I was then escorted to my office, where I packed up everything in there while the HR person watched (and to some extent, helped) and then to my car.

Here’s what didn’t happen:

- Any specific mention of a particular posting or even particular blog (as many of you know, I participate in or run about half a dozen blogs).

- Any warning, disciplinary procedure, discussion, or any other process by which I was notified of the “problem.” This was especially egregious, as previous instances of faculty having “objectionable” postings on their blogs have been treated by discussing it with the faculty member. I was fired outright without any opportunity for discussion at all.

- My being allowed to say goodbye to anybody or talk to anyone on the way out, ostensibly for the purpose of “confidentiality.” I was hustled out of there in a surprisingly furtive fashion. Nobody even knew I was gone.

- ANY disparaging comment about my students, on ANY blog, EVER! That is just not accurate at all. My students are my heart. But you knew that.

Was the blog so bad?

First of all, it doesn’t matter, because companies should not be in the business of regulating their employees’ off-hours activities. That being said, I sure didn’t think so, but hey, see for yourself. Email me for access to any of the protected posts: Once you convince me you won’t be too badly damaged by my dangerous, dangerous thoughts, I’ll give you the passwords. I haven’t edited ANYTHING, even where I looked back and found some typos, and you know that drove me crazy. DeVry does have a policy about employees not putting anything in personal blogs that could hurt their stock prices. It literally begins with the phrase, “DeVry is a publicly traded company.” Their interests are clear. However, to my knowledge, nobody reading my blog is big into playing the market, or owns or has considered owning stock in DeVry, I never had access to that kind of information, and I don’t own stock or stand to benefit, so it does not fit the definition of insider trading. I did not violate that policy, but that wasn’t what I was fired for anyway.

I honestly don’t know which postings were supposed to be so offensive. My personal blog is largely about whatever is on my mind, and occasionally, it was my work teaching at various programs, including DeVry’s and as many as four others. If one searches for the word “devry,” in every one of my archive pages, through hundreds of postings, there are only a couple of things that aren’t glowingly positive. Those are no more than water-cooler kvetching (for example, about being told not to give my students good grades, or about DeVry hiring practitioners rather than teachers–which they proudly do–or about having to fill out a lot of paperwork, or having to waste a bunch of time on unnecessary online training), and not the sort of thing one generally gets fired over. Come on, fired for bitching about paperwork?! The entire government would be out of work. Furthermore, they weren’t things I hadn’t mentioned to the administration already, so if it offended them, they should have fired me then, asked me to shut up, or not hired me later.

Any more pointed critiques did not mention the name of the institution, and, given that I’ve been teaching for a few different programs, do not give specific evidence of being about DeVry–one would have to infer it, and might not infer correctly. “Driver, throw this man off the bus! He’s humming the tunes to dirty songs!”

Finally, because all those posts were months (to years) old, I was basically fired as an employee for something I had “done” many months ago as an independent contractor–essentially in a completely different job. Yup, fired for something I ostensibly “did” at MY LAST JOB, not at that one. Furthermore, subsequent to those postings, I was re-hired as an independent contractor (potentially multiple times, depending on the age of whatever posting they claim is the problem) and then hired as a full-time employee. How jacked up is that?

What really bothers me about all this, though, is that the wrong people are getting punished. The messages I’ve been getting from my students are anywhere between absolutely outraged and wrenchingly heartbreaking. They have been confronting the administration, offering me endless kindness and support, and a few are even leaving the program, saying this was the last straw. The work we did together was important to all of us, and the students feel really ripped off that it won’t continue. It’s one thing to punish an employee for doing something you don’t like. It’s another thing to punish your own clientele.

Can they do that?

Maybe. Colorado is an “at-will” state, so I can be fired for any reason, because my mama dresses me funny, or no reason, without notice. Local and state agencies here don’t really address this sort of thing yet, either: they handle things like discrimination on the basis of sex, race, age, religion, creed, etc. Nobody but the ACLU seems to handle First Amendment issues, and they’re ironically impossible to get through to. This might very well be a good opportunity for a public dialog about this issue, though. We could start here: How come Ward Churchill gets to keep his job when the things I said were not even said in class, or to my students, or anywhere near as inflammatory? How can someone be fired not for her actions, but for her THOUGHTS? Where does an organization so hostile to free speech and critical thought get off calling itself a university?

So do I wish I had done some things differently?

Maybe. For one thing, I had a lot of trepidation about applying for the job in the first place. I liked my previous relationship with DeVry and didn’t really want to mess with it (sort of like deciding to date a friend), but the lure of financial stability was pretty seductive, and I was getting a lot of encouragement to do it, which was flattering, and as you know, I’m a sucker for flattery. If I had it to do over again, I wouldn’t apply. I was not okay with some of the things I observed going on there, and I had a few “what-have-I-done” moments just in the first month at that job. Now, of course, I am thoroughly creeped out.

I wish I had known that some people take this stuff so seriously. As one student pointed out after I told him what had happened, “But a blog is just an opinion. It’s not even a reliable source.” Right! Good man! It didn’t occur to me that people who so fundamentally didn’t get it would have the slightest interest in my random noodlings. I would have offered more selective access to the blog, or taken down my profile and posted anonymously. And, had I been given the opportunity, I would have implemented those or a range of other changes sooner.

I might have clarified a few things. For instance:

1. I have had pedagogical contact with literally hundreds of students over the last year and a half, and they ranged in age from 18 to somewhere in their 70s. They are all old enough to decide for themselves whether or not I am a good writer, whether or not they agree with me, and what they would like to infer from what I write. Furthermore, when a student plays as much Grand Theft Auto as some of my students at DeVry do, nothing I could possibly write is going to offend them. To imply that they somehow need to be protected from my words is not only censorship, it insults their intelligence.

2. When I say “my students,” I’ve had as many as a hundred or so students at a time in various programs, not counting the ones in dance classes at the studio where I worked for over 6 years. Could be anybody. When I mentioned earlier this year in one posting my awareness that some of my students were interested in my blog, those were mostly graduate students, my age contemporaries and older, and not my students at DeVry. My grad students had asked me how I handled self-censorship, and I told them about my one and only experience with it: when my mom had found my blog the previous summer. I showed them a few postings from that time period–none of them racy–the disclaimers, and the silly one about my mom’s email, and how stilted the ones were where I was trying really hard to write to please somebody else. They asked me an important question as a writer and as a colleague, and that is exactly the spirit in which I answered them. Some of them later wanted to follow my writing, and they sought out my blog. I did not point them to it, but I knew from their questions that a few were reading it, and I let them be their own judges of my work. As for my students at DeVry, I don’t think they were reading it–but they sure are now! Since last week, I’ve had a number of questions about the blog and how to get at it that lead me to believe they hadn’t looked for it before. So if firing me to protect the little dears was what DeVry had in mind, they fired me for nothing, and in fact generated both animosity toward themselves and student interest in the blog where previously, there hadn’t been much to speak of. It may actually be one of the best things that has ever happened to my blog–it’s like having a banned book, and it’s made me something of a folk hero. In the future, I now have something to tell students who ask me about good, old-fashioned censorship by others, too, and then I’ll tell them all about banned books.

3. Apparently, the sharpie who discovered my blog did not read the “disclaimers” section. In a way, that’s pretty funny: so busy looking for something “bad,” he or she completely avoided information. This is a vain enterprise, purely about my own thoughts, and one shouldn’t read the parts that offend one. He or she also should consider eating more fiber, as it is very good for the colon.

Finally, none of all that really matters, because nobody should be fired for her thoughts or opinions. Certainly, her critics are free to disagree with her, or even, hey, call her a total idiot or try asking her to modify her behavior as a condition of employment–that is their right as well. I love America, I love the Constitution, and I loved working with the students (and the vast majority of employees) at DeVry. I could not be more proud of the students’ resistance to what has happened. They are questioning the administration, and exercising their own rights to free speech in the face of the violation of another’s.

Now, for their sake as much as anyone’s, the time has come for a public dialog about this issue. Talk about it, blog about it, communicate about it, and do not be silenced until some resolution is reached. If an employer fires someone in violation of her basic Constitutional rights, it should expect some publicity about that.

In parting, I will share with you my favorite ethical rule of thumb. My father-in-law, whom we lost in July, and for whom I have two eulogies posted here, worked as a corporate executive for most of his life. He negotiated any number of business deals over the years, and when they got tricky, he always used to tell his team, “Don’t bring me a deal I can’t tell my mother about.” If you don’t want to explain to your family or to Mike Wallace what you did, you probably shouldn’t have done it. I told my family all about what happened to me, and I’d be happy to give Mr. Wallace a jingle. They all believe in the First Amendment.

43 Responses to “Dooced!”

  1. Blogspotting Says:

    Is blogging a fireable offense?

    A blogger gets fired from a Colorado university–but without learning what she did wrong.

  2. Mark Jen Says:

    Hi Meg, sorry to hear you’ve joined the dooced club like me :)

    Unfortunately, as you know, the First Amendment doesn’t apply to us since we were employed by businesses, not the government. Since Ward Churchill works for University of Colorado - a public school - maybe he’s actually protected by the First Amendment.

    Is the system right? Maybe… maybe not. After all, this country is built on capitalism and free enterprise. If a business wants to fire someone for running a blog, then that’s their decision I suppose. In the long run, I’d have to assume that being closed-minded will catch up to them…

    Sorry for your loss; hopefully, it’ll work out for you as well as it did for me. Clearly, with your depth of thought and genuine interest for your students, you shouldn’t have a hard time finding a new position - it’ll probably be better than the one at DeVry anyhow.

    Good luck!

  3. Meg Says:

    Hey, thanks, Mark, the kind words, the support, and for commenting. You’re exactly right–the system hasn’t really been questioned much. Had someone at DeVry just said to me, “Hey, Meg, the eulogies (or whatever) on your blog are offensive and creeping people around here out. Do you think you could do something about that?” In all likelihood, I would have. And they had done that with at least one other instructor. Instead, though, I had a 30-second firing, no discussion, and then got whisked out of the building.

    In all the corporations I know, there’s a disciplinary procedure, where employees are notified of problems and given the opportunity to address them (unless they’re, say, felonies). So not only was I not afforded the protection of the First Amendment on the public side, I wasn’t even afforded the standard disciplinary procedure on the private/corporate side.

    Needless to say, it was a weird, weird, weird experience.

    Thanks again for the comment, and for the perspective.

  4. Mike Souders Says:

    I’ve been considering starting a blog, but I find your story disturbing and discouraging. I don’t know that I’d comment about work that much, but would like to feel the liberty to do so (with caution probably) when I get the urge. I agree that there should be discussion on this topic. I also feel you were wrongly dismissed. I’ve only got your side to go on and I don’t think DeVry would offer their side anyway - they didn’t even share enough of it with you when they let you go.

    Looking back on the 80’s, I think it will be a while before Corporate America gets around to changing HR policies. It took several public lawsuits before sexual harassment policies were implemented. Unfortunate! Like others who have commented, or blogged on this topic, I think it needs to be addressed now.

    Good luck! I think you’ll be better off in the long run.

  5. Brian Says:

    Wow, what a bizarre event. Unbelievable.

    I’ve been a reader of Megablog for a long time and I have to say that I actually came away impressed with DeVry after reading the things you wrote about your work there. It makes no sense to me that this would or could happen.

    What am I to think about DeVry now?

    Needless to say, I’m not impressed with their decision. Since my name is at the top of my company’s letterhead, it should matter to DeVry what I think.

  6. Meg Says:

    Thanks, Mike and Brian!

    Like you, Mike, I never intended for my blog to be about work, and like you, Brian, I thought what I said about DeVry was for the most part pretty positive. Ayuh, a mighty, mighty weird situation.

    Thanks very much for commenting, and for joining in the public dialog. It may be a long time before policies are implemented, but it’s never going to happen at all unless we start talkin’.

    Thanks again!

  7. john cass Says:


    I was sorry to hear about your firing from the university, especially in the circumstances, very bizarre. I hope DeVry learns from their mistake. Maybe their stock price will dip?

    I am sure you will find another job soon. What will you do next?


  8. Lisa Williams Says:

    Hey, Mike, if you really want to blog, don’t let that stop you. Try a service like Invisiblog, which uses anonymous remailers to make it impossible to trace a blog back to an individual user. Just call yourself Zorro and your employer Zorro’s Paycheck!

    It is a bummer that DeVry is doing this. Many, many people get a foothold into a good job through technical colleges and community colleges, and it’s sad to think that freedom of speech is only for colleges kids with rich parents can afford to go to. It shouldn’t be that way.

  9. Lisa Williams Says:

    Meg, you should post a link to this, too, for readers/bloggers who will be coming to your blog with questions: The EFF’s Guide To Blogging Safely About Work (Or Anything Else).

    While I think it’s terrible that any employer — PARTICULARLY a university — isn’t on the side of free speech, I think anonymity has a legitimate and vital place in the world of blogging. It’s not anybody’s job to educate their employer about the value of the First Amendment unless they volunteer to do it. The EFF guide gives information about how to blog in a way that avoids confrontations with an employer.

    For those people who are blogging under their own name, I think it’s worth thinking about setting forth a clear statement in your own words about what you think your blog is and isn’t about. Most employers have absolutely nothing to fear and a lot to gain from their employees’ online presence. What’s your corrections policy? Privacy policy? Do you blog about work? All questions to think about. Here’s an overview of blog policies with links to plenty of examples of different ones that take different views on the subject of privacy, transparency, rules for comments and corrections.

  10. Meg Says:

    Hey, thanks.

    I don’t know what I’ll do next. I have had other employment (other adjunct/TA work) lined up for January at other institutions. Yesterday, when it became obvious that this story was expanding well beyond the small circle of bloggers I know first- and second-hand, that I had to tell a lot of folks what was going on, including those other employers.

    So I did about all I could do at this point. I told them what happened, pointed them to the Post article and the buzz, and to the blog. I haven’t heard back from them yet. They could be out of the office, or they could be totally stunned and not know how to handle this (with which I would, of course, totally sympathize).

    The top priorty for a while has been finishing my dissertation, which has often been thwarted by the fact that we don’t live in a Star Trek society where we all just hang out trying to better ourselves and nobody has any money and we like it. In a perfect world, a bag of money would fall at my feet from out of the sky, with a note attached to it that says, “Meg: Here! Finish it already!”

    Barring that, once I finish, I’d like to go teach at a university that likes me, some nice tenure-track gig with cool students where I get to focus on teaching and writing. I used to think I wanted to go to a nice, cozy think tank or research facility, but the truth is that I really love teaching. One of the wonderful gifts I got from DeVry was the knowledge that I love the classroom, probably too much to leave it entirely.

    I suppose I could try and get some work as a professional writer or blogger at this point, quick, before these 15 minutes are up. That’d be good, too. It also occurs to me that now that a lot of people are paying attention to what I have to say, I should probably say something good. So I’ll try and do that, too.

  11. Dread Sovereign Lord Says:

    What? You mean that you did not advance the bottom line? As a favorite of mine once wrote: ‘Accumulate, accumulate, that is Moses and all the prophets!’.
    As if it were not enough to be alienated from our labor, now we are alienated from our thoughts- from the greatest of potentialities, that form-giving fire.
    Be strong, and carry a big stick Meg.
    Hasta la victoria sempre!

  12. Meg Says:

    Actually, I think I was advancing the bottom line. My classes were pretty popular and had to be generating quite a lot of income.

    Thanks for the rage and support, Dread. It seems to me that the best way to fight sensorship is to keep talking. I aspire to your admirable heights of resistance. Although, I wouldn’t turn down Oprah. :)

  13. Blog Goodies » Around the Blogosphere… Says:

    [...] Is Blogging a fireable offense? Yes. If bloggers could better monetize their marketshare then perhaps it would not matter. [...]

  14. Leigh Blackall Says:

    Hi Meg,

    Leigh from Australia here. Very sad to read your story. I too lost a job at a uni for blogging.

    Although it was certainly for the best in my case (that uni was really getting me down) I have found it quite hard to get over - having to answer to at least one job interviewer wanting to know about it.

    Your story strikes me as even more unjust than mine, so you’d have to be pretty thick skinned to get over your blow. My advise is simply to blog on through it. Eventually it will become a distant memory and the hurt and fury will fade (but never go away). Our experiences make up who we are after all.

    If you’re worried about getting a rep for being ‘that’ blogger who got fired… don’t sweat it, anyone who holds you to that isn’t worth your time.

    BTW I really love the picture on your blog. The burning Kombi. Really great! Please email me a link to it’s story.

  15. Meg Says:

    Thanks, Leigh, for the support, and for sharing your story.

    I’ve had a number of questions about the flaming microbus, so I also wanted to mention to the rest of you how it came about. Lisa picked it out when she moved my blog, and I really like it. I don’t know who took the original picture, but not having a story just means we can make some up. Anybody have a good one?

  16. Borderland » Blog Archive » Bloggers Rights, Reinvention, and….Who Knows What? Says:

    [...] The next thing that happened was fateful. I noticed that Graham Wegner and Leigh Blackall both posted links about a teacher who lost her job for blogging. I was captivated by this story. Most briefly, Meg Spohn was abruptly dismissed from her university teaching position in Colorado because she is a blogger and she wrote about her work. She gives a good account of what happened. All I can say is that it strikes me as an outrageous tactic to silence and intimidate educators who wish to speak publicly. Because of this - I’ve been online now for a couple of hours working through this - I went back to EFF and made my donation. [...]

  17. Mary McKinney aka Academic Coach Says:

    Wow, Meg, from what I’ve seen, your blog is innocuous — I can’t see any reason for the dooce. Plus, the stir around your termination will prove much worse publicity for DeVry than any gripes you could have concocted.

    However, your situation re-proves the unfortunate truth that untenured profs are wise to keep their personal blogs pseudonymous.

    Good luck finishing your dissertation.

  18. Mary McKinney aka Academic Coach Says:

    P.S. I’d assumed that the bombed van was a metaphor for how you’ve been blown away by the DeVry administration.

  19. corrie Says:

    Two rules of thumb I’ve lived by for a long time:

    “Never do, write, or say anything in public that you’d be embarassed to explain to your spouse, mother, pastor, or boss. (Consider your computer public.)”

    “I’ve never been fired for speaking my mind. If it ever happens, I didn’t want to work there anyway.”

    But I’ll still re-read my employee manual. Good luck, and thanks for not being quiet about this. Kudos to your students.

  20. Kelly Says:

    I was dooced this year also and just wanted to let you know that sometimes it is a big blessing in disguise.

  21. baileybud Says:


    So much for academic freedom. Wonder what AAUP would think?

    There’s more opportunities — don’t fret. Think I’ll pulling bag that idea of night classes from DeVry — perhaps look at Phoenix, Capella or Westmont, instead.

  22. Meg Says:

    Thanks so much for all the support. I’ve responded to some of these personally, but I did just want to mention to corrie up there that my mother reads my blog. There’s nothing on it I wouldn’t want my mother to see, because she SO will. My spouse has seen it, and I don’t have a pastor, but other family members have read the whole thing as well. I certainly didn’t anticipate that my boss would be bothered my things that didn’t offend my mother. Frankly, my former immediate boss is a great guy–I doubt he was involved in any of this.

  23. Universityprofessor Says:

    I also teach at a private university and I think that what happened to you is deplorable. One of the basic tenats of education is academic freedom and all faculty, tenured or not, should have the ability to put their thoughts in writing. I also have a blog and I have refrained from the start about commenting in the blog about my work. I know this experience has been hard on you, but hopefully you will find a better institution to teach at. Good luck to you and I hope that everything works out for you.

  24. Meg Says:

    Thanks very much for your support. Yes, I do hope there’s something better coming down the pike–or at least that I won’t have to recant and spend my life under house arrest.

  25. Matt Simmons Says:


    I came across this blog entry on Google. It’s very interesting, and shows me that DeVry Columbus is not unique in it’s attitude towards anyone under it’s jurisdiction.

    I think you might find my friend’s recent LiveJournal entry interesting. Here’s the url:

    He got turned down from a job BECAUSE he got a EET degree from DeVry.

    Anyway, thanks for your time, and I’m sorry that DeVry screwed you over, too.

    /ex CIS student (1998-99)

  26. Meg Says:

    Thanks, Matt! I’ve responded to Matt personally, but the livejournal stuff he references is pretty interesting…

  27. Erik Ringmar Says:

    Dear Meg, love your blog! I’m very interested in hearing more about your experiences. I’ve also had problems with my university because of blogging (story here: In fact, I’m writing a book about free speech in universities and would love to hear more from you. Could you get in touch?

  28. Meg Says:

    Thanks, Erik, and good to hear from you! Everybody: you should check out Erik’s blog above, too–he’s a good writer, and incisively clever…

  29. Andrew Dunn Says:

    I was really caught by your comment “Where does an organization so hostile to free speech and critical thought get off calling itself a university?”. I am a DeVry University student online and have repeatedly been warned that I will be expelled from the University after I complained about incorrect material being taught in class, lecturers violating course guidelines, etc. I often refer to DeVry as the University of Communism.

  30. Meg Says:

    Aww, most of the commies I know are nice folks. I see what you’re getting at, though: the 1984-like attempts at mind control and all.

  31. Autorités énonciatives et espaces de publication et de référencement / Evelyne Broudoux « évaluation et validation de l’information sur Internet Says:

    [...] La pratique du blogging est-elle compatible avec l’énonciation scientifique lorsqu’elle fait preuve d’autonomie ? Cette question en apparence simpliste prend son sens à la vue des sanctions prises contre des doctorants  suite à des positions publiées sur leur blog , d’où quelques mises en garde . Un espace libre de publication peut favoriser une recherche dégagée des tutelles, forcer la sortie d’un cadre institutionnel qui ne sert quelquefois qu’à nourrir la pensée labellisée d’une autorité et favoriser recherche d’indépendance et autonomie, préalables à des choix librement assumés. Mais cet espace qui sert avant tout à une énonciation personnelle risque de pousser l’étudiant blogueur sur une autre pente, au mieux celle de la dispersion , au pire celle de l’auto-suffisance. Ouvrir un blog personnel et l’alimenter quotidiennement entraîne le blogueur, qu’il le veuille ou non, dans une action d’autopromotion dont il faudra bien apprendre à gérer les conséquences. [...]

  32. Meg Says:

    Nice to get some global linklove!

    Thanks, but I think you’re really missing the point, both of my experience and of why people blog at all. Yeah, I lost a job because of my blog, but it wasn’t because I did anything wrong, was short-sighted or using flawed logic. It was because the institution I was working for violated my right to freedom of expression.

    Also, as a result of my experience, I became sort of a folk hero to a lot of people. I met some great folks I never would have met otherwise, and I got a pretty good-sized readership, which is a nice thing for a writer. The lesson is not, “Hey, you should be afraid to blog because of what might happen to your career.” The lesson is, “Don’t work for somebody who thinks it’s okay to fire people for their thoughts.”

  33. I’m Blogging This » Blog Archive » Meg Spohn, DeVry University Says:

    [...] “Dooced” [...]

  34. Erik Ringmar Says:

    Hi Meg,

    How are you? We chatted briefly a year ago about blogging and freedom of speech. I got into trouble at a university in London for maintaining a blog.

    Anyway. My book on blogging and freedom of speech on the internet was just published — — and you’re in it!

    Thanks for cheering me up a year ago. The bloggers will inherit the earth.

    yours, Erik

  35. Meg Says:

    My pleasure! Lemme post this link right up front!

  36. Kate Olson Says:

    Meg -

    I just linked to this post from my blog (in a comment response)at When I wrote the post early this a.m. I was very uninformed on the issue, but am quickly being brought up to speed. Remember, this is coming from a BRAND NEW blogger’s perspective :-)

  37. Meg Says:

    Thanks for the linklove, Kate!

    After this post, there are a few dozen that reflect a great deal on my experience and resources for the nervous blogger. You already have my thoughts on the post you allude to above. :)

  38. Erik Ringmar Says:

    Hi again Meg,

    This is Erik, your fellow docee from London. I just found out that a guy at Harvard uses my Blogger’s Manifesto for a course on “the arts of communication.” Link here:

    Isn’t that cool? I love the thought that all those Harvard kids are discussing your case, DeVry hiring policies, and reading those great quotes from you.

  39. Meg Says:

    Wild! Thanks for the heads-up, Erik–I’ll put this up front, too. :)

  40. The Dangers of Blogging | My Blog Says:

    [...] on secrecy. And in some instances, the reason for firing is totally unclear, as was the case of Meg, who was fired from DeVry University without any explanation, and Troutgirl, who was fired from [...]

  41. Dalton Woolhiser Says:

    Nice one! If I could write like this I would be well happpy. The more I read articles of such quality as this (which is rare), the more I think there might be a future for the Net. Keep it up, as it were.

  42. The Dangers of Blogging | The Blog That Ate Manhattan Says:

    [...] on secrecy. And in some instances, the reason for firing is totally unclear, as was the case of Meg, who was fired from DeVry University without any explanation, and Troutgirl, who was fired from [...]

  43. Karlyn Boule Says:

    Kudos for posting such a helpful blog. Your weblog isn’t only informative but also incredibly artistic too. There normally are incredibly couple of people who can write not so very simple articles that creatively. Maintain up the wonderful work

Leave a Reply