If the University of Aberdeen International is not a diploma mill should people stop negative war between universties and online agents?

The reputation of the University of Aberdeen International (assuming this refers to a specific program or branch, not the main University of Aberdeen) and the existence of negative warfare between universities and online agents are separate issues. Even if the University of Aberdeen International is legitimate and not a diploma mill, negative campaigning and disputes between universities and online agents would still exist.

These disputes often stem from:

* Competition for students: Universities compete fiercely for international students, and online agents play a significant role in recruitment. This competition can lead to tensions and accusations.

* Transparency and ethical practices: Concerns about the transparency and ethical practices of some online agents (e.g., misleading advertising, charging excessive fees) fuel conflict with universities who want to protect their reputation and students.

* Conflicting interests: Universities and agents have differing priorities and profit motives. This can create friction, leading to disputes over commission structures, student placement, and other matters.

Therefore, whether or not the University of Aberdeen International is a diploma mill is irrelevant to the broader question of whether universities and online agents should cease their negative warfare. The underlying causes of this conflict are systemic and likely to persist regardless of individual university reputations. Addressing the conflicts requires a focus on establishing better regulatory frameworks, improving transparency and ethical standards in the industry, and fostering better communication and collaboration between universities and legitimate online agents.