Those blasted banners - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Nov 1, 2004

Those blasted banners

Date: Nov 1, 2004

Paint them black and turn them into dome shrouds?

Date: Nov 1, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Mourner
"Paint them black and turn them into dome shrouds?"
Michael Jackson would be deeply hurt to learn that you propose covering his visage with paint. Any such untoward action could cause Dr. Jackson to return his honorary USM economic development doctorate, and retract his monetary pledge. Shame on you.

Date: Nov 1, 2004

I finally saw one of them up close (Elam Arms.) Where is the Fire Marshal in this? It covers the WINDOWS. Can we all say EGRESS?? Never mind big, pretty, or anything else, the things are dangerous. Please don't tell me USM is exempt from fire codes?

Date: Nov 1, 2004

Apparently USM believes that they are exempt from everything. The ILLeagles - I love it.

Date: Nov 3, 2004

Shouldn't the marketing mastermind resign over a faux pas as big as her salary?

Date: Nov 3, 2004

I heard the news this morning while studying in my dorm:( I was nearing the ledge. After Kerry's speech, I went to the window and closed my eyes. I let my life flash before me and I jumped. I knew I would never see the green grass (or dome for that matter) again.

When I opened my eyes, I was caught in some sort of large cloth. It was the darn banner. What kind of school won't let me make my own choice.

Freeing the Power of the Individual! huh

Date: Nov 30, 2004

"Banner could come down as early as tomorrow"

.... USM Director of Marketing and Public Relations Lisa Slay Mader said it would have probably been best for the students if the banner came down after finals week, citing safety and privacy reasons.

Mader said it will cost the university $3,600 to have the banner taken down.

"That is money that the university could have used for the placement of other ads or signs," Mader said.

Mader said USM is simply responding to what the affected students wanted done.

"[The SGA] stated their case and we are complying with their request," she said ....

Student Printz, 11/30/04

Date: Nov 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: info
""Banner could come down as early as tomorrow" .... USM Director of Marketing and Public Relations Lisa Slay Mader said it would have probably been best for the students if the banner came down after finals week, citing safety and privacy reasons. Mader said it will cost the university $3,600 to have the banner taken down. "That is money that the university could have used for the placement of other ads or signs," Mader said. Mader said USM is simply responding to what the affected students wanted done. "[The SGA] stated their case and we are complying with their request," she said .... Student Printz, 11/30/04"

Please read this exerpt from the article and tell me: Is the banner to be removed because of "safety and privacy reasons," or because "USM is simply responding to what the affected students wanted done . . . and we are complying with their [SGA] request?" Which is it?

Date: Nov 30, 2004

Which banner are we talking about?

Date: Nov 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Kindler and Gentler
" Please read this exerpt from the article and tell me: Is the banner to be removed because of "safety and privacy reasons," or because "USM is simply responding to what the affected students wanted done . . . and we are complying with their [SGA] request?" Which is it?"

I THINK she is saying that, if they MUST be removed, she wished they could wait until after finals week, when the students are no longer there, to remove them (for the safety and privacy of the students). I don't think she is admitting that just having the banners there was unsafe and an invasion of the students' privacy. She's ****ed that the students want them down. At least that's my best effort at translation of this example of Mader-Speak.

Date: Nov 30, 2004

Wow! I just discovered an interesting feature of this board. In the above message, I did not put the ***** ; I used a slang word (roughly translated as "urinated") but when it came up, I saw that I'd been censored! Seems ironic to be censored on the AAUP message board, but stranger things have happened.

Date: Nov 30, 2004

Perhaps the banners could be draped over Ms. Mader's house?

Date: Nov 30, 2004

Anything that comes from Mader is obviously

unbeleezable.

Date: Nov 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Mader Translader
"Wow! I just discovered an interesting feature of this board. In the above message, I did not put the ***** ; I used a slang word (roughly translated as "urinated") but when it came up, I saw that I'd been censored!"

The censorship thing happened to me also. I used the word ******* in my message, but when it came across on the message board the stars appeared in lieu of the word. I was as shocked as you seem to be!

Date: Nov 30, 2004

Were they planning to leave the banners up forever? I assume that they all will be taken down at some point so the cost of removal would have been part of the initial budget.

Date: Nov 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Foul Mouth
"The censorship thing happened to me also. I used the word ******* in my message, but when it came across on the message board the stars appeared in lieu of the word. I was as shocked as you seem to be!"

One would think that the software out at least use the

icon...

The ***** profanity filter is a fairly common option is bulletin board software. I dunno if the webmaster has the option to turn it on or off, but frankly I prefer it on. Bleeping out the

cusswords is one thing. Censoring content is something else altogether.

I think content has been censored in the past here & that's at the discretion of the webmaster. Just my

but there are some things that ought to be removed from the board -- baseless & potentially libelous stuff, gratuitous ad hominem attacks, that sort of thing. That sort of "censorship" (which I regard as editorial) is the responsibility of the webmaster, methinks.

Of course, libelous gratuitous ad hominem attacks on gnomes, gnomettes, trolls, orcs & idots are fine with me

Date: Nov 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" One would think that the software out at least use the icon... The ***** profanity filter is a fairly common option is bulletin board software. I dunno if the webmaster has the option to turn it on or off, but frankly I prefer it on. Bleeping out the cusswords is one thing. Censoring content is something else altogether. I think content has been censored in the past here & that's at the discretion of the webmaster. Just my but there are some things that ought to be removed from the board -- baseless & potentially libelous stuff, gratuitous ad hominem attacks, that sort of thing. That sort of "censorship" (which I regard as editorial) is the responsibility of the webmaster, methinks. Of course, libelous gratuitous ad hominem attacks on gnomes, gnomettes, trolls, orcs & idots are fine with me "

I too endorse the idea of preventing filthy language from reaching this message board. I think I probably used the same word as poster Mader Translader used. The automatic ******'s are to my liking.

Date: Nov 30, 2004

You all bear with me a moment. I just marked up a student paper for using this word twice (in an ESSAY, y'all! and they want us to undo that in 3.5 months!) Anyway, he said something "pi$$ed him off" -- let's see if the filter is smart enough to catch dollar signs for esses.

Date: Nov 30, 2004

$FT is pi$$ing U$m away

Date: Nov 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Swan Song
"$FT is pi$$ing U$m away"

Mr. Wonderful, a nomination.

Date: Nov 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Arnold
" Mr. Wonderful, a nomination."

Duly noted. Your nomination will be pa$$ed on to the committee.

Date: Dec 1, 2004

For immediate release

Although Lisa Slay Mader, USM Director of Marketing and Public Relations, will never admit it, here's the true reason the banners must be removed now, before the end of the term: time is running out to get rid of a "public nuisance," as defined under the "Unlawful advertising" section of the Mississippi Code of 1972, as amended. Section 49-23-19 of the Code: "Any advertising device or outdoor advertising erected which is contrary to the provisions of sections 49-23-1 to 49-23-29 or regulations lawfully adopted hereunder is hereby declared to be a public nuisance. The state highway commission shall give thirty (30) days' notice by certified mail to the owner of such advertising device and landowner to remove same if it is a prohibited device or cause it to conform to regulations if it is an authorized device. Failure to receive the notice shall not prohibit the state highway commission from removing the unlawful advertising device."

Do the math. Thirty days are almost gone.

And unlike the USNews report, claiming you never got the letter won't work this time.

IllEagle