In truth, no one should trust any credentials on an anonymous internet forum like PDF. We don't know the identities or credentials of the site staff, so how can we rely upon their vetting process? We cannot, so there isn't much utility in demanding that an individual should present credentials to the administrators.
As for our "State Department" friend, I'm of two minds. On the one hand, the unprofessional writing style, the lack of lucid, analytical thinking, and the undiplomatic temperament make me highly suspicious of this individual. On the other hand, it's precisely those qualities that dominate our real State Department and make it the least respected component of the executive branch in America (which is why foreign policy has been conducted by the Pentagon, and not the State Department, for the last 15 years). Therefore, it's entirely possible that this individual is who he says he is, in which case, I can only shake my head and pity him.
At the end of the day, credentials on a site like this don't matter, it's the quality of input that matters. Whether someone is an unemployed janitor in real life (like me
), or a Fulbright Scholar, we should not be swayed by credentials and titles, but rather by quality, lucidity, and the ability to cite universally recognized sources as support for arguments. One of my first posts on PDF questioned the utility of the TTA title, because the quality of TTAs is just as mixed as the general population. More than six months later, I still haven't come upon a satisfactory answer.
We should take a step back and take PDF for what it is: not a forum for serious discussion, but rather, a source of entertainment. Let our "State Department" friend have his fun, as will we.
