Moderation Notes

[Archivist]

New season, old rule, same reminder.

We never discuss the possibility that internal candidates have an "inside track" for a given position. Do not speculate on whether there is/was an internal candidate, or whether a specific search is/was intended to favor an internal candidate. Please see the thread Moderating Claims of "Inside Hire" if you need more clarification. This moderation rule is always in effect.

I also want to point out a common example of flawed reasoning. If an institution is searching for a tenure-track position in an area that is currently covered by a contingent faculty member, that could be interpreted as evidence of the department's commitment to that particular area (rather than to a specific individual).

[Archivist]

And once again. See the note above.

[Archivist]

And again. See the note above.

[Archivist]

And, less than one month later, again again. See the note above.

[Archivist]

I have removed one post and modified a few others that referenced it. We still don't speculate on whether any candidates have an "inside track" or have a favored status for a given position.

[Archivist]

We do not speculate on the possibility that a candidate has an inside track for a position, and we certainly never name potential applicants.

[Archivist]

We never discuss the possibility that internal candidates have an "inside track" for a given position. Do not speculate on whether there is/was an internal candidate, or whether a specific search is/was intended to favor an internal candidate. Please see the thread Moderating Claims of "Inside Hire" if you need more clarification. This moderation rule is always in effect.