January  UTC  Paul writes I dont have to prove Shakespeares collaboration with Wilkins by complex simple or any other evidence Experts do that We use the consensus of accredited scholars and editors of the text See WPRS   Ahbut you said that you wouldI am holding you to your wordIf you want to chicken out now its ok by meYou are claiming there is a consensus about a complex bit of proof which you refuse to reveal   And we are not going to pay another one of those Comrade Stalin rules bitThere is no other discussion page on the entire Wickie where a rent a mob plays the games that are played on this subject   YesI am always honored to have students write to meI never had a letter from a postModernist University before though I got quite a few from Duke students when the infamous gang of  Duke academicsthe numbers actually varied from  to  somethingwere tryingquite literally to lynch members of the the Lacrosse team That was a real  academic consensusPaulMuch better than any evidence of a consensus about PericlesIt includedstill does Huston Baker former president of PMLAand Karla Hollowaywho was rewarded for her behavior by a temporary lectureship at Harvard In fact it included the entire English department with the exceptionof course of the antiStrathorrors personal research   No this type of concensus doesnt disturb me or those for whom I write andI am ever enheartened to find new proofthat such a Marxist view of concensus it isnt intimidating the youngThe reasons why William Shakspere is in all probability a fraud are exactly the same type of reasons that Crystal Mangum was raped by theefivefifteen or thirty members of the Duke Lacrosse teamForstarters you cant fit a thosand pounds of fleshCrystals minimum figure into a nineteen forty two by fourjohn   Neverthelessthe overwhelming concensus of the Duke English facultyone lone antiStrat dissentingis that it did happenAnd I see no reason why if the Wickie rules which you invoke are consistently appliedthat the Duke Lacrosse Hoax should not be revised accordingly  Or lets take another example hereWickies admirable treatment of the Alger Hiss casea trial which I have followed blow by blow since the sIt states correctly that there is almost a consensus as to Hisss guilt among the present generation of American historiansNot I suspect true of British or Eastern bloc historians But it admirably goes on to list some twenty reasonswith footnotesdemostrating why there are the most serious reasonssome of them physical as in the Duke case for disbelieving that consensusThis constitutes a minimum of what both the young aand the old have a right to expect of the Shakespeare discussions I would further suggest that you take your Ashbourne argument over to the main board where others can criticize itThis is the first time you have attempted a reasoned argument to sustain your position since I came hereYou should write more of them No matter how fouly you behave nothing could get you kicked off this web siteAnd you know darn well who I am I use the monicker here to keep up continuity with a number of discussions which I am penningOne of them involves an Alaister Crowley style magician who claims to be majoring in iconography at Sussex UniversityNot one of your boys by any chance