Comments on: Outing ‘Sharon Gould’: the hoaxer’s identity revealed http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/ now with extra source Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:04:11 +1100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Laura http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13116 Laura Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13116 This was perhaps worth noting in a blog, but probably not quite so extensively in Crikey. I don't know that it really warranted very much explanation/justification and is beginning to detract from the key issue of editorial deficiencies at Quadrant. The focus should remain on Windschuttle. This was perhaps worth noting in a blog, but probably not quite so extensively in Crikey. I don’t know that it really warranted very much explanation/justification and is beginning to detract from the key issue of editorial deficiencies at Quadrant. The focus should remain on Windschuttle.

]]> By: Pappinbarra Fox http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13117 Pappinbarra Fox Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13117 In one month"? You are joking. In one week it will be forgotten. I fervently hope. In one month”? You are joking. In one week it will be forgotten. I fervently hope.

]]> By: Mr. Fake Name http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13118 Mr. Fake Name Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13118 "because an author has snuck through an article known to have some fraudulent foot-notes?"<br /><br />THE "AUTHOR" DOESN'T EVEN EXIST. NEVER HAS NEVER WILL. Windschuttle didn't even bother to check that the author was a real existing person in the world. He accepted an essay from a complete figment, a lie, a hollow name. <br /><br />Quadrant would have been better off printing an essay by Mickey Mouse or Bugs Bunny. Even they can be said to exist more than 'Sharon Gould'. They even turn up legitimate results in Google, or so I'm told! “because an author has snuck through an article known to have some fraudulent foot-notes?”

THE “AUTHOR” DOESN’T EVEN EXIST. NEVER HAS NEVER WILL. Windschuttle didn’t even bother to check that the author was a real existing person in the world. He accepted an essay from a complete figment, a lie, a hollow name.

Quadrant would have been better off printing an essay by Mickey Mouse or Bugs Bunny. Even they can be said to exist more than ‘Sharon Gould’. They even turn up legitimate results in Google, or so I’m told!

]]> By: JamesK http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13119 JamesK Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13119 To Rick Roush: <br /><br />Dear Rick if Crikey were to attempt to correct all its errors there would simply be no time to put out daily editions such as this filled with still more errors.......<br /><br />Yours Unfaithfully, Jonathan 'Red Boy' Green To Rick Roush:

Dear Rick if Crikey were to attempt to correct all its errors there would simply be no time to put out daily editions such as this filled with still more errors…….

Yours Unfaithfully, Jonathan ‘Red Boy’ Green

]]> By: John James http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13120 John James Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13120 I've got to say I just dont see what all this fuss and high fives amongst the Left commenteriat is about. Quadrant is a superb magazine precisely because it promotes debate and takes contributions from a cross section of opinion. Its founding editor was a devout Catholic convert and poet and its most recent editor a religious sceptic. Quadrant's board is drawn from different and diverse backgrounds. You couldn't get more diverse than Bill Hayden and Peter Coleman and Quadrant, unlike its rivals, such as The Monthly, publishes letters of criticism. It never pretends to be peer reviewed but. in a sense, the reviewing is done by the readership. One will often find letters taking an article or author to task from a previous edition so why the self congratulations because an author has snuck through an article known to have some fraudulent foot-notes?<br />Windshuttle is not a trained scientist but a very well trained historian. His criticism of some of the black armband crew was precisle that they were loose and sloppy with their own work, often fabricating facts. Long will I remember Lyndall Ryan's protests that there are " two truths". Reminded me of the Bolshevik show trials. I’ve got to say I just dont see what all this fuss and high fives amongst the Left commenteriat is about. Quadrant is a superb magazine precisely because it promotes debate and takes contributions from a cross section of opinion. Its founding editor was a devout Catholic convert and poet and its most recent editor a religious sceptic. Quadrant’s board is drawn from different and diverse backgrounds. You couldn’t get more diverse than Bill Hayden and Peter Coleman and Quadrant, unlike its rivals, such as The Monthly, publishes letters of criticism. It never pretends to be peer reviewed but. in a sense, the reviewing is done by the readership. One will often find letters taking an article or author to task from a previous edition so why the self congratulations because an author has snuck through an article known to have some fraudulent foot-notes?
Windshuttle is not a trained scientist but a very well trained historian. His criticism of some of the black armband crew was precisle that they were loose and sloppy with their own work, often fabricating facts. Long will I remember Lyndall Ryan’s protests that there are ” two truths”. Reminded me of the Bolshevik show trials.

]]> By: john http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13121 john Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13121 I don't get it. What circumstance has forced Katherine Wilson's hand? Simons/Crikey pressure? Needs explaining. <br />John I don’t get it. What circumstance has forced Katherine Wilson’s hand? Simons/Crikey pressure? Needs explaining.
John

]]> By: Lakun http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13122 Lakun Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13122 Who's Keith Windshuttle? <br /> Who’s Keith Windshuttle?

]]> By: john pasquarelli http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13123 john pasquarelli Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13123 typical Leftie Hoaxer - sniping from the bunker of anonymity - AND a coincidental pregnancy! - any dumbo knows that kitchens can be warm places. John Pasquarelli Newstead VIC (03)54762004 typical Leftie Hoaxer - sniping from the bunker of anonymity - AND a coincidental pregnancy! - any dumbo knows that kitchens can be warm places. John Pasquarelli Newstead VIC (03)54762004

]]> By: David Robinson http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13124 David Robinson Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13124 Would someone PLEASE tell Ms Simons that she ain't the story Would someone PLEASE tell Ms Simons that she ain’t the story

]]> By: Kato http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13125 Kato Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13125 As Mr Fake Name points out, and I have commented before, the fact that the existence of the author of the article was not even checked IS a big deal - for ANY publication. That's the main issue to keep in mind here, regardless of whether there is a bit of point scoring going on. Also, the idea of publishing an article merely to generate debate (as Quadrant does), irrespective of the veracity of the content, is so incredibly dubious, that I wonder how anyone can brush this off as a meaningless exercise. As Mr Fake Name points out, and I have commented before, the fact that the existence of the author of the article was not even checked IS a big deal - for ANY publication. That’s the main issue to keep in mind here, regardless of whether there is a bit of point scoring going on. Also, the idea of publishing an article merely to generate debate (as Quadrant does), irrespective of the veracity of the content, is so incredibly dubious, that I wonder how anyone can brush this off as a meaningless exercise.

]]> By: Tom McLoughlin http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13126 Tom McLoughlin Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13126 Katherine possibly misunderstands the capacity for campaigner analysis. She hadn't written for a while so a good prospect of going under cover. She had the record on very good stories on the politics of genetically modified organisms which appeal to greenies like moi. <br /><br />As I was saying on Marg's blog I can demonstrate I had it by 4.32 pm on Tuesday under my "Mmm" comment, but earlier actually as I read it early arvo at the local job agency instead of doing my job applications. Ha ha. Which is where I ought to be right now, and God bless Barry Cohen for being symapthetic in a piece in The Oz in mid December being an ex Federal ALP minister when unemployment was stalking the land.<br /><br />I was thinking as I read the lead story - who wrote those strong GMO stories for crikey in the last year. Then I was trying to remember is it Murphy, is it Kate. As it was I googled the right name first time and when I saw "co-editor of Overland" on the face of the search it was doh. Motive being a rival journal. Skills being an editor. Skills having written on the topic. Motive being of the progressive side of things. And also Modus Operandi. KW's articles showed depth of research, which was a plank of the hoax too. <br /><br />But you never can be sure. I thought about blogging it for myself but hey I thought the traffic should go to those that did the project so I put it in a comment. To be honest I was also thinking, if I'm wrong, or it's denied I could be sued for defamation so I left it as speculation. Bit lawyerly coward there but yeah it's true. Katherine possibly misunderstands the capacity for campaigner analysis. She hadn’t written for a while so a good prospect of going under cover. She had the record on very good stories on the politics of genetically modified organisms which appeal to greenies like moi.

As I was saying on Marg’s blog I can demonstrate I had it by 4.32 pm on Tuesday under my “Mmm” comment, but earlier actually as I read it early arvo at the local job agency instead of doing my job applications. Ha ha. Which is where I ought to be right now, and God bless Barry Cohen for being symapthetic in a piece in The Oz in mid December being an ex Federal ALP minister when unemployment was stalking the land.

I was thinking as I read the lead story - who wrote those strong GMO stories for crikey in the last year. Then I was trying to remember is it Murphy, is it Kate. As it was I googled the right name first time and when I saw “co-editor of Overland” on the face of the search it was doh. Motive being a rival journal. Skills being an editor. Skills having written on the topic. Motive being of the progressive side of things. And also Modus Operandi. KW’s articles showed depth of research, which was a plank of the hoax too.

But you never can be sure. I thought about blogging it for myself but hey I thought the traffic should go to those that did the project so I put it in a comment. To be honest I was also thinking, if I’m wrong, or it’s denied I could be sued for defamation so I left it as speculation. Bit lawyerly coward there but yeah it’s true.

]]> By: tony Mora http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13127 tony Mora Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13127 Ok, good read Margaret. Marks? The test of time is the only criterion worth passing - or marks worth waiting up for. From my humble viewpoint - fun. Ok, good read Margaret. Marks? The test of time is the only criterion worth passing - or marks worth waiting up for. From my humble viewpoint - fun.

]]> By: kd http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13128 kd Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13128 according to "diary of a hoax" she finished writing the story in July. For her to have not been preggers when she submitted it but in labour now makes for a very short pregnancy. Perhaps it's a GM wonder child ? according to “diary of a hoax” she finished writing the story in July. For her to have not been preggers when she submitted it but in labour now makes for a very short pregnancy. Perhaps it’s a GM wonder child ?

]]> By: Wot if? http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13129 Wot if? Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13129 Perhaps the Quadrant article is genuine, and the hoax is actually Wilson's/Simon's claims of its disingenuity and false authorship. But how are they supressing the real Shane Gould's objections that he (she) is, in fact, the author(ess)? This is the real question that has yet to be asked by the media and the blogododecahedron. Perhaps the Quadrant article is genuine, and the hoax is actually Wilson’s/Simon’s claims of its disingenuity and false authorship. But how are they supressing the real Shane Gould’s objections that he (she) is, in fact, the author(ess)? This is the real question that has yet to be asked by the media and the blogododecahedron.

]]> By: Colin Stokes http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13130 Colin Stokes Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13130 A few days ago I poked a sea anemone with a stick. It contracted as though my stick was a piece of food. Contracted I tell you! Ha! Whilst the beach rangers and assorted busybodies demanded to know who had poked the anemone and which stick I had used, I mused on the possibility of giving the stick its own column. I am yet to understand what was achieved other than proving a primitive organism is slave to its nature. But then I’m no scientist.<br /> A few days ago I poked a sea anemone with a stick. It contracted as though my stick was a piece of food. Contracted I tell you! Ha! Whilst the beach rangers and assorted busybodies demanded to know who had poked the anemone and which stick I had used, I mused on the possibility of giving the stick its own column. I am yet to understand what was achieved other than proving a primitive organism is slave to its nature. But then I’m no scientist.

]]> By: martin http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13131 martin Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13131 Excellent piece. This full and forthright explanation gives the context and motivation of author and publisher. It has been a most entertaining debate but remember, this business has a serious side. In the end we are talking about the (re)construction of history and memory. Excellent piece. This full and forthright explanation gives the context and motivation of author and publisher. It has been a most entertaining debate but remember, this business has a serious side. In the end we are talking about the (re)construction of history and memory.

]]> By: Jack http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13132 Jack Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13132 The USA has Madoff, even India has Raju.<br />Why can't Australia do fraud on a decent scale ?<br />I know it is still the holidays, but lead story ?<br />...*Yawn* The USA has Madoff, even India has Raju.
Why can’t Australia do fraud on a decent scale ?
I know it is still the holidays, but lead story ?
…*Yawn*

]]> By: Rick Roush http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13133 Rick Roush Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13133 By an interesting coincidence, I was interviewed by the Age about Gould's Quadrant hoax a few days ago. I cannot remember even hearing of Karen Wilson before today, but have now learned that she has a protected website about me, which came as quite a surprise (http://katherinewilson.wordpress.com/2008/02/29/professor-rick-roush/). Why is it protected? No idea, but then, I don't know what Wilson has written there. <br /> <br />The Age reporter has brought to my attention that Wilson has a previous article in Crikey that mentions me and others. It has several errors, of fact and interpretation, including various accusations. Wilson never contact ed me for comment, and I doubt she contacted the others attacked in her piece. is there a mechanism for me to ask Crikey for a correction?<br /><br />Rick Roush<br /><br /> By an interesting coincidence, I was interviewed by the Age about Gould’s Quadrant hoax a few days ago. I cannot remember even hearing of Karen Wilson before today, but have now learned that she has a protected website about me, which came as quite a surprise (http://katherinewilson.wordpress.com/2008/02/29/professor-rick-roush/). Why is it protected? No idea, but then, I don’t know what Wilson has written there.

The Age reporter has brought to my attention that Wilson has a previous article in Crikey that mentions me and others. It has several errors, of fact and interpretation, including various accusations. Wilson never contact ed me for comment, and I doubt she contacted the others attacked in her piece. is there a mechanism for me to ask Crikey for a correction?

Rick Roush

]]> By: Jane http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13134 Jane Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13134 Excellent story Excellent story

]]> By: Brian http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13135 Brian Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13135 Much journalistic ado about nothing. Windscuttlebut deserves to be exposed for his blythe acceptance of scientific spin by an unknown "author". However, further pointscoring by all concerned is another indication of the self important poofery of those involved. Much journalistic ado about nothing. Windscuttlebut deserves to be exposed for his blythe acceptance of scientific spin by an unknown “author”. However, further pointscoring by all concerned is another indication of the self important poofery of those involved.

]]> By: chris http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/08/outing-sharon-gould-the-hoaxers-identity-revealed/#comment-13136 chris Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-13136 Wilsons article does not display a clear and concise train of thought (even taking into consideration my understand that it has been subject to editing). The question that must be now asked is, is this her own work? Or is the work itself a "hoax" of plagiarism? Wilsons article does not display a clear and concise train of thought (even taking into consideration my understand that it has been subject to editing). The question that must be now asked is, is this her own work? Or is the work itself a “hoax” of plagiarism?

]]>