A couple of interesting things about the Mary Rosh postings. First, in her book review Mary Rosh refers to "Professor Lott". At that time he was a John M. Olin Fellow at Chicago and certainly not a professor. In another post she claims that he was a chaired professor at Wharton. You can check Lott's resume and see that he was an assistant professor at Wharton and did not hold a chair.
skippy also has a few comments.
More like this
If you don't know who Mary Rosh is, you might want to read "The Mystery of Mary Rosh". Also of interest might be the blog post that unmasked Mary, and the latest Mary Rosh news.
[Editor's note: Most of these postings were made to Usenet. Some were made to comment sections on blogs, two are…
Mark Kleiman has posted an email from Michael Maltz with some comments on Lott and his research. An extract:
It seems that most of Lott's critics and supporters forgot about what I feel is the most damaging lie he told while hiding behind the skirts of his fictitious Internet persona…
Via Eli Rabett I find a long article by James L. Meriner in Chicago magazine on the Lott-Levitt lawsuit. There's some new information on the history of Lott and Levitt such as this:
Just when and how the Lott-Levitt feud started is not clear -- neither man would directly comment on the lawsuit…
Lott's responses to Michelle Malkin's op-ed are in a fixed-width font, while my comments on his response are in italics like this. Lott's responses were downloaded on 25 April 2005.
Below is Malkin's op-ed with commentary by me (my comments are indented and in italics and start…