Dave’s audience is divided. About 40% agree with his nuanced critique, arguing that he has been fair and evidence-based. Another 30% think he is still too harsh on Jeffcott, pointing out that she has mentored dozens of successful students and has publicly revised one of her positions on NDAs following new evidence.
The remaining 30% think Dave is obsessed. One popular comment reads: “Dave, you dropped out six years ago. Jeffcott has tenure. She doesn’t think about you at all. Move on.”
But Dave’s response to that criticism is telling: “That’s exactly the problem. She should think about people like me. Because people like me are your students before they drop out. People like me are the ones who see the hypocrisy up close and decide the whole system isn’t worth it. If Jeffcott and her peers won’t think about us, then who will?” What Does Dave Think About Professor Jeffcott
Before we can answer what Dave thinks, we must first understand the players involved.
Dave (last name withheld by request across various platforms, though often linked to the handle @ModernHeretic on Substack and X) is a former graduate student turned independent researcher. He dropped out of a prestigious PhD program in philosophy six years ago, citing “institutional rot” and “performative scholarship.” Since then, Dave has built a modest but fiercely loyal following by dissecting the work of tenured academics. His writing style is sardonic, meticulously cited, and unafraid to name names. He doesn’t consider himself an anti-intellectual; rather, he positions himself as a pro-accountability maverick. Dave’s audience is divided
Professor Sarah Jeffcott, PhD, is a tenured full professor at a mid-sized liberal arts college in the Northeast. Her specialty is applied ethics, with a focus on digital privacy and professional codes of conduct. She has published two well-received books and numerous peer-reviewed articles. By all external metrics, she is a successful, thoughtful academic. She is also known for her sharp tongue in faculty meetings and her notoriously difficult “Ethics in the Professions” seminar.
Their paths crossed indirectly—then directly—over a period of three years, beginning with Dave’s review of one of Jeffcott’s journal articles. The remaining 30% think Dave is obsessed
When people ask Dave what he thinks about Professor Jeffcott, the short answer is: admiration mixed with a few reservations. Below, Dave’s perspective is laid out in a balanced, readable way—covering Jeffcott’s strengths, the specific concerns Dave raises, examples that shaped his view, and what Dave ultimately hopes for going forward.