iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

5/5 Public input is clear: 120 DOT comments unanimously condemned the 40% rule. The DOT should step in to protect consumers, force transparent downgrade criteria, and make under-refunded passengers whole.

000

4/5 A better approach: Refund the actual fare difference between cabins, based on prices at the time of purchase. If AA chooses not to preserve the historic lower fare, use the lowest published fare for the lower cabin on the purchase date. Reservation systems can provide that easily.

100

3/5 How do passengers even verify the math? AA's proposed refund depends on internal data regarding what other passengers paid. Good luck getting transparency or disputing a suspicious calculation.

2/5 Under AA's new proposal, downgrade refunds equal the customer's premium fare minus the average economy fare on that flight. The math works out great for AA, not for passengers: Downgrade an early-booking premium traveler, pay a tiny (or zero) refund, and resell that seat at top dollar.

1/5 Downgraded by American Airlines? After Mike Borsetti and I complained to DOT, AA abandoned its controversial "40% refund" rule. But its proposed replacement creates even bigger problems. www.regulations.gov/document/DOT...

regulations.gov

Regulations.gov

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 10/07/2026

Shopping plugin Phia is forcing clicks and dishonoring stand-down. Clear violations of affiliate network rules. My article provides video and packet log evidence. www.benedelman.org/phia-forced-...

benedelman.org

Serious misconduct by shopping plugin Phia: Forced clicks and more – Ben Edelman

100

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 03/07/2026

Interesting assessment. What evidence led you to this conclusion?

000

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 21/06/2026

Dialog has invited me several times. Every year's invitation includes a list of names a lot like what's in the screenshots in @crimew.gay's post. I always thought the event was pricey, and for that and other reasons I didn't attend. Would like to see their notes about me!

000

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 15/06/2026

Also at www.regulations.gov/document/DOT... . Wild facts -- AF issued ticket, sent email, let passengers check in... and then AF canceled. Then AF customer service accidentally forwarded the customer their internal deliberations trying to figure out why they canceled the ticket. What a mess!

000

Reposted by Ben Edelman

Aaron Greenspan @aarongreenspan.com · 11/03/2026

The media absolutely screwed Ben on this story. He’s a hero—the only business school professor I’ve ever known who even considered fighting for the little guy, let alone who actually did—and did not deserve the treatment he received.

031

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 02/03/2026

To make it sound like I was out of line, FRB had to twist evidence. I explain in my video www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-video2/ at 32:04. The real story here isn't that I did or didn't find a projector problem, but that FRB went out of its way to try to make me look bad.

Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

YouTube

000

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 02/03/2026

"Projectorgate" refers to staff seeking to reduce MBA classroom projectors by 17% to 31% without telling faculty. I found out and told a few colleagues, who complained to a Dean, who insisted on reversal. Some people thought I was rude. I thought teaching & learning more important than saving face.

100

Ultimately, I'd say Edmondson and FRB were just out to get me. They had decided the 2014 incidents meant I had to go. But there was no consensus in broader faculty for that decision. They had to find something else to torpedo me, hence these pretextual reasons. Not permitted under P&P rules.

In a 2015 meeting, FRB members discussed learnings from interviews. P.9: Edmondson: says "everyone loves him" (meaning me) and explains why -- that I'm useful to know ("gets them free stuff"). www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-docs/ja-e... I do try to be useful. Why is this grounds for criticism?

When Edmondson gathered evidence, it kept portraying me positively. For example, first two interviews were positive. www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-docs/ja-e... To that, she proclaimed "sigh." www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-docs/ja-e... She WANTED people to criticize me and was annoyed when they didn't.

"Projectorgate" - check out www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-video2/ at 32:04 as to FRB's remarkable effort to conceal favorable evidence. IT leaders had blunderously made screens 16% to 31% smaller without telling faculty. Thanks to me, this was fixed and did not affect teaching or learning.

Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

YouTube

Now, to senior IT leaders, maybe I was more threatening. If they had an idea I disagreed with, I would state my view and insist on a rigorous discussion on the engineering merits. Felt it was worth the time for high-stakes decisions affecting thousands or tens of thousands of students.

And I had warm relationships with junior IT staff. We worked hard at fixing bugs, finding better ways to get things done--I relished this stuff, and they liked having a faculty member in the trenches with them.

Not as simple as "cultural fit". I loved HBS. I enjoyed writing cases (which many junior faculty did not). I cared about teaching so much that I wrote software to make me (and others) better at it, so much that I pre-tested my classroom to make sure everything worked. These are HBS core values.

And a decade earlier, I had asked Associate Dean Jean Cunningham what approval if any was required to originate lawsuits. She (correctly) told me none. Somehow those crucial facts--that I asked, what she told me, that there truly was no such policy--are all absent from FRB report. Out to get me!

In deposition, FRB member Stu Gilson said my class action against American Airlines (re bag fee overcharges) was improper bc it could cause AA not to enroll in HBS executive programs. Transcript below. www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-docs/ja-d... page 10. But I violated no policy. Big company bias.

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 28/02/2026

You're right that Edmondson wanted me out. Representative quote: “obvious that we shouldn't have him on the senior faculty" (before collecting any evidence in 2017). I don't know what led her there. Compare widespread praise for me in her interviews www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-docs/ja-e... .

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 28/02/2026

The mistake I allege in this lawsuit is that HBS FRB did not follow its procedure. HBS in turn says the policy is not binding, not a contract, so it doesn't matter if they followed or not.

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 28/02/2026

Did you watch the video from which that screenshot is taken? www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-video2/ The quotes sound terrible. But each one is seriously flawed. For example 10 and 12 are FABRICATIONS, not in interview notes. Even H's lawyers couldn't find them in the emails they're supposedly from.

Edelman v. Harvard - The Evidence Withheld

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

Ultimately universities are run by faculty, versus companies by and for shareholders. It does not surprise me that a group of faculty would vote to create significant procedural protections *for faculty*. Indeed this is how HBS FRB policy arose--widespread concern that prior policies were unfair.

In contrast, my general sense is that in most parts of the economy, skills are somewhat more transferable. Can a successful marketing manager at Starbucks become a successful marketing manager at Chipotle? I think so, maybe to a slightly greater degree than HBS->Wharton or what have you.

At HBS, specifically, junior faculty make school-specific investments. HBS wants junior faculty to write teaching cases, and learn to teach in a style that is only common at HBS. If faculty thought promotions would be arbitrary, it would be a bad deal to invest time in these ways.

Deep question! Narrow answer is because the policy says so. Indeed, I wanted nothing more than what the policy promised.

Andrew King posted an incisive series on LI: www.linkedin.com/feed/update/... www.linkedin.com/feed/update/... www.linkedin.com/feed/update/... www.linkedin.com/feed/update/... www.linkedin.com/feed/update/...

Many discussions on X including a closer look at the restaurateur who intentionally overcharged customers for years. Ex-partner says he hid income and drove a $279k SUV, while I cycled. Who's the bully? And tragedy: He offered drugs to a date, who declined. She was dead, overdose, the next morning.

Update in my lawsuit against Harvard: Judge ruled against me on all key points. FRB P&P is not a contract. I can’t prove H violated P&P. Any procedural violations didn't harm me bc Dean Nohria says he would not have recommended tenure regardless. My remarks: www.edelman-v-harvard.org/reflections-...

Reflections on Decision on Summary Judgment – Edelman v. Harvard

220

Even "abrasive" is not disqualifying. The policy at issue is supposed to evaluate alleged "misconduct"--not a personality test. www.edelman-v-harvard.org/docs/frb-pan... I just wanted to be evaluated in accordance with the posted rules. HBS plainly did not do so. www.edelman-v-harvard.org

As to "abrasive": I don't think we've met, so your information is probably what you read about me or what you inferred. Respectfully, you may be wrong. Check out these excerpts from my submission to FRB as I fought to clear my name. More at www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-docs/ja-e... p.42

220

People thought I was bullying the restaurant. But family court docs say he drove a $289k Mercedes, while I rode a bike. Who's the bully? I wrote in my personal capacity. He figured out I was Harvard faculty, saw a way to get free publicity at my expense. I got played on multiple levels.

Much more to the restaurant kerfuffle than most people know. Restaurateur had overcharged for years, other customers complained, and he once called the police in response to a customer complaint. Some screenshots here. I have more.

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 30/01/2026

Preformed conclusion. When chair Amy Edmondson received evidence that presented me favorably, she said she was "anxious". Called that subject "not the right one to pick"--meaning the "right" subject would be one that presented me negatively. Opposite of following the evidence.

000

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 30/01/2026

Recurring problems: Selective excerpting. Remarks contrary to the witness's own words in a contemporaneous letter or in deposition. Speculation about contexts the witness did not observe. Confusion about key facts the witness criticized.

100

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 30/01/2026

The HBS committee that evaluated me offered 13 negative quotes. Turns out just two witnesses contributed almost half these quotes (6/13). Two other quotes were falsified and are not found in interview notes. My new video critiques this sloppy work: www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxRi...

youtube.com

Edelman v. Harvard - The Evidence Withheld

YouTube video by Ben Edelman

Ben Edelman @benedelman.org · 17/01/2026

In response to Megalag's video and my article showing Honey not just failing to stand down, but affirmatively concealing that violation -- affiliate networks Rakuten and Impact have expelled and suspended Honey.

Rakuten message to merchants about expelling Honey

Impact message to merchants about suspending Honey

000

Fortunately most junior faculty don't go through what I went through!

Interactive AI explainer, in NotebookLM, is trained on the key documents. Try asking “What does Edelman say the FRB did wrong?” or “Did the FRB provide Edelman with the evidence gathered?” notebooklm.google.com/notebook/a6a... (11/11)

000

Video explainer offers highlights of these concerns, grounded in primary source documents. www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-video/ (10/11)

100

1000+ pages of evidence newly posted, including letters evaluating my candidacy, FRB reports about me, my reply, and countless internal discussions. www.edelman-v-harvard.org/summary-judg... (9/11)

100

HBS leaders deleted key docs after litigation was not just foreseeable but actually foreseen. In spring 2018, an Assoc. Dean emailed Dean Nohria that I was “seriously considering suing.” Yet he wiped his tablet containing notes preserved nowhere else. www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-spoliation/ (8/11)

HBS senior faculty destroyed evidence, though they had a duty to preserve it. – Edelman v. Harvard

100

FRB held me to a higher standard than other faculty. HBS’s self-proclaimed chief compliance officer: “one could interpret the selective enforcement of our community standards on a single candidate as discriminatory.” No kidding! www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-bad-faith... (7/11)

The FRB acted in bad faith, and predetermined the outcome. – Edelman v. Harvard

100

In FRB’s first meeting in 2017, members had already made up their mind. One said he was “seething” and found me “irredeemable.” Chair: “obvious that we shouldn’t have him on the senior faculty.” All this, before collecting one piece of evidence. www.edelman-v-harvard.org/sj-bad-faith... (6/11)