Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
 
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> dean of COAL
Post Info TOPIC: dean of COAL
stephen judd

Date:
RE: RE: dean of COAL
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"to amy, invictus, and others--i stand by my remarks. i can't reveal all of my sources. i'm not talking about the FS working with the administration. i know they have to do that. i'm talking about members of these bodies who in other capacities in the university want subadministrators to do things that they would publically speak against. and if the bodies like the FS knew what was going on, they would publically condemn. but lots of the business of the university does not happen in the open. people go to people's offices and have private conversations where these things happen. there are good ole boy poker games. i know of one incident in the past two months where a subadministrator sensed something was wrong about what was going on. the faculty member in question said so-and-so has let us do that. the subadministrator took it to lee gore who said it was ill-advised, if not illegal. as i said, most of the time i roll my eyes when i hear some of these people make public pronouncements relating to people's ethics. last night--i couldn't live with what i see as hypocrisy from some people. there are some fine folks on these councils. but there are others that aren't so pure. when i get really cynical about USM i make invictus look like pollyanna. "

Institutions, organizations, etc. tend to manifest the best and the worst aspects of those who belong to them. One of the strengths of institutions is that occasionally they can rise to exceed the mediocrity and hypocrisy of many (if not most) of the individuals who belong to them. On the other hand -- those same institutions can also drag down those very same members who are also often decent people with modest ideals and influence them to either do or allow horrible things. Such is the nature of human organizations . . . .


I've probably gotten shallow in my old age. I don't spend a lot of time thinking about it because I expect people to be a mix of motivations. I accept that sometimes people can, under unique circumstances, transcend themselves and act for the common good or for a common ideal, even though that action might totally fly in the face of anything I might have expected of them based on previous encounters. Of course, I'd also be somewhat suspicious that other agendas were in play -- and I think I'd be right. So it makes me cover my ass when I deal with them -- but I am going to deal with them none the less or nothing of any value would ever get done.


I think one of the reasons I find reading about the early history of our government during the revolutionary to constitutional period so interesting is to watch all of these dramas in play -- and to watch people who are struggling with not only how to discern the "right" thing in larger terms, but also how to enact the "right" thing while still protecting their own self interest. Our whole government system is based on the realization that humans are complex actors who both need to be protected -- and also need to be prevented.


It would be comforting if we all could trust our own reasons for our actions. Or if people would always clearly announce their motivations for their decisons or actions. Or if we could all know that in working together we not only professed the same set of ideals -- but we all agreed to consistently abide by them. But that would fly in the face of everything we know about human society.


So I am not suprised that you see people who might in one area be strongly professing an ideal and perhaps even acting on it, while in another realm they might even be imitating those they decry. I'm not saying this is healthy -- it is probably a good reason for the self examination Socrates intimates every human being ought to periodically undertake. But it certainly isn't unexpected and I personally no longer let it disappoint me very much.


 


 


 



__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

stephen--i am very aware of the nature of humans--and like you, i generally don't give it much thought. but when people on this thread says things like "all administrators from chair up are corrupt" and you act like deans on this campus didn't appreciate or side (or pick your favorite word) with the faculty, i normally just shake my head and say "so sad." i know enough to thing that's naive at best, possibily ill-informed. but last night i said "enough is enough." i also think that we have to hold the leadership of these councils, senates, etc. to a higher standard. if they are going to make public statements they need to be of impeccable university character.

__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

edit--take out the "s" in says, and change "thing" to "think" gotta watch out for the grammar police.

__________________
Sad

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
" .... But it certainly isn't unexpected and I personally no longer let it disappoint me very much.      "

That's a good thing Stephen.  Otherwise, at this institution, you would surely go insane.  However, I have to say I sure have been disappointed a lot in the last 3 years.



__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen--i am very aware of the nature of humans--and like you, i generally don't give it much thought. but when people on this thread says things like "all administrators from chair up are corrupt" and you act like deans on this campus didn't appreciate or side (or pick your favorite word) with the faculty, i normally just shake my head and say "so sad." i know enough to thing that's naive at best, possibily ill-informed. but last night i said "enough is enough." i also think that we have to hold the leadership of these councils, senates, etc. to a higher standard. if they are going to make public statements they need to be of impeccable university character. "

I am assuming the "you" (as in "you act like deans on this campus didn't appreciate . .  .etc.") isn't a pronoun referring to me since my original post was intended to point out that there are administrators at any number of levels who have been quietly working, if not on the faculty's behalf, at least in ways that might parallel the faculty's interests. My concern is exactly about tarring a class of people with a big and very unspecific brush. We all know that we do it rhetorically every day (as in "did you hear what the DEANS did? THEY . . . etc.) But in conversations about issues in which we are trying to discern who potential allies might be, we should be really careful not to assume that to be an ally only means working above ground. Every good campign in politics and war requires a clandestine layer of activity in which the motivations of the actors are decidedly mixed. The reason this area ois of interest to me is in trying to envision a post Shelby University: we are going to need to work effectively together.


It is hard for me to respond to your post without understanding who the actors are -- so perhaps I should have just restrained the urge.


 


 


 



__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

stephen--here are some selected passages from your post of last night:

1. I think it possible that there are administrators who have begun to understand that they can no longer continue to compromise with the administration in the hope that they will ultimately be able to help "civilize" the barbarians who run the dome.

2. I think it is time to welcome everyone who wants to cross over -- we should encourage it no matter what we think of the motivation.

3. It is also how we will begin to heal once the reign of terror ends. We want to be careful -- Robespierre's thirst for revenge is not a good example to follow if we want to put the pieces back together in a post Thames world . . . .

The first two bothered me--it suggests that "administrators" (painting with a broad brush) only recently have begun to understand they can't compromise with the administration. Some never have believed that, if you know them well. i see people make comments about deans and other people, and i always wonder--how well do you know them? do you know the decisions they have been making? Again, note I use the word some--I try to be careful enough not to paint with any brush larger than i have to. Crossing over? Some have never been against the faculty. But some people have bought into an "us versus them" rhetoric. i frankly wouldn't want to be administrator--particularly the subadministrators, the associate deans etc. i know some of the tough , day-to-day decisions they have to make. not a lot of glory in some of them.

Your last comment i added is one i agree with and worry the most about.



__________________
COAL miner's daughter

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"... people on this thread says things like "all administrators from chair up are corrupt..."
stinky cheese man, I've not seen anyone on this board make such a sweeping statement.

__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

i'm paraphrasing someone but yes one person used such a sweeping statement. i ignored it, but what worries me is whether people are thinking that. that's the reason i agree with stephen's comment that the aftermath of all this mess is critical to the future of the university. i read people using analogies to collaborators in WWII and i begin to wonder--do you really believe the analogy?

__________________
COAL miner's daughter

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"yes one person used such a sweeping statement.  "
stinky cheese man, I believe that you did attribute the statement to someone on this thread. I did a word search of this thread on my computer but found nothing. I don't think my computer is defective.

__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

cmd--if i implied this thread, i didn't mean to. on some thread the past few days (up to 5 days ago) someone made such a sweeping statement. i spent the last 5 or so minutes trying to figure the thread, but there are so many new ones i can't. like i said, i ignored it but it is worrisome.

__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen--here are some selected passages from your post of last night: 1. I think it possible that there are administrators who have begun to understand that they can no longer continue to compromise with the administration in the hope that they will ultimately be able to help "civilize" the barbarians who run the dome. 2. I think it is time to welcome everyone who wants to cross over -- we should encourage it no matter what we think of the motivation. 3. It is also how we will begin to heal once the reign of terror ends. We want to be careful -- Robespierre's thirst for revenge is not a good example to follow if we want to put the pieces back together in a post Thames world . . . . The first two bothered me--it suggests that "administrators" (painting with a broad brush) only recently have begun to understand they can't compromise with the administration. Some never have believed that, if you know them well. i see people make comments about deans and other people, and i always wonder--how well do you know them? do you know the decisions they have been making? Again, note I use the word some--I try to be careful enough not to paint with any brush larger than i have to. Crossing over? Some have never been against the faculty. But some people have bought into an "us versus them" rhetoric. i frankly wouldn't want to be administrator--particularly the subadministrators, the associate deans etc. i know some of the tough , day-to-day decisions they have to make. not a lot of glory in some of them. Your last comment i added is one i agree with and worry the most about. "

 


 


I don't think my phrasing that "there are administrators" is restrictive. I was not addressing any theoretical subset of administrators who may have believed themselves to be on the faculty's side from the beginning.


I also think it is possible that an administrator might believe himself/herself to be "on the side of" or sympathetic to faculty interests and yet not perceive that an administrator's view of what is good for the faculty and what the faculty believe is good for the faculty might not be the same. I think that difference in perception has informed our discourse throughout this last two years. I think it is important for administrators to remember that they are in a far better position to promote their own views of what constitutes good for the faculty than the faculty is -- they are in a much better position to actualize their views of what is ggood for the faculty as well -- because they have an access to the power to make chnage that faculty do not.


What I had in mind in comment one is my belief that many of the new deans came in not fully convinced that things here were as bad as some faculty members portrayed the situation to be. Those administrators continued to act as though they could, in effect, soften some of the rougher edges of an administration they did not necessarily see as out of control. (I'm not completely convinced that some administrators actually started out agreeing with the administration that the problem was that the faculty is out of control).


I think that (before the parens) was a fair position to have had -- things here were so bad it must have been almost unbelievable to contemplate any administration could be as brutal as this one was portrayed as being.


My belief -- and what I want to assert to those on the board who might want to hang anyone above a certain rank no questions asked -- is that I think it is possible in a theortetical sense that some of those administrators have migrated to a different point of view -- having experienced how capricious this administration often is in its actions and how fundamentally unchangible it is even if some of its individual actions have been to retreat when confronted.


I want to remind a few people that it wasn't all that long ago that there were people on this faculty who said terrible things about Myron Henry when he was Provost. I think we have learned since that not only was the relationship between then Provost Henry and Horace Flemming professionally complicated, but that MYron has since been a true champion for the ideal of what constitutes a university and for the role of faculty in academic affairs and governance.


Now, having said that, I'll also agree that nothing that happened under Flemming remotely compares to the disaster that this administration has caused us -- complete with its inhumane treatment of many of its own faculty and staff.


You last couple of paragraphs actually support my point -- I believe that there are administrators who are trying to both hang on to their jobs and do the right thing in a very difficult situation. I am not going to be the one to say they all should quit -- that is a decision only they are capable of making, whatever I want.


On the other hand  -- some of these administrators are paid very well for their work so I also think it is a very thin line between continuting to collaborate and carry out the orders of an administration that truly is out of control while believing that your presence and your presence alone can hold back the effect of the worst of these decisions on the faculty. I think that thag kind of thinking conmveniently ignores the impact a deanor other high administrator could have with a very public resignation citing reasons. But once again, we all have to feed our familes and make a living and I'm not about to tell someone they should put themselves in that kind of jeopordy. After all, I'm still working here too -- so we are all compromised to some degree.


And that is my chief point. Very few of us are completely pure here. There is a world of difference between those who are trying to climb the ladder full speed ahead and damn the bodies left behind and those who are trying to figure out how to survive intact and do the least harm possible -- and maybe be in a position to do some good.


I'm not prepared to make that decision for an administrator and say what he/she should do -- but I'm also not prepared to accept at face value that we have a lot of closet idealists around the center of power . . . I think a certain amount of skepticim is necessary.


Sorry this post is so long -- my thinking about why people do things and what informs their actions tend to be pretty contingent, I'm afraid, and very relativist.


I'm don't apoligize for the "Us" vs "them"  quality of the post. We are all human beings and creatures of God, that is sure. But a rabbit is going to be really dead rabbit if it takes the line that the bobcat it sees in the brush is a mammal and hence, being like himself a mammal, doesn't pose a danger. He's going to have a chnace of survival if he also notes that though a mammal, this particualr mammal has long teeth, eats meat, and is fast as hell. Those who have the least power have to think in us vs them terms in order to survive. Once we have established an agreement that enables us to survive, we can begin to discuss our similarities.


It as in the hope that we might be reaching that point in which survival might not necessaily be an every day risk that I wanted to open up a dialogue about the Post Shelby era and how to conceive  of it.


I'm going to dinner.


 



__________________
In love

Date:
Permalink Closed

Stephen, will you marry me? Oops. I'm already married to a really great person.
You are one smart cookie, but better than that, you are wise.

__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

stephen--as i said last night i think we agree on 90+% of issues. the better administrators don't forget that they are still faculty members, and many plan to return there. many teach--they interact with students, direct student work, etc. (and i'm not talking thames). but one thing i've learned is that the view changes as you move up the organizational hierarchy--i have a view of things as a faculty member. my chair's view of my department is probably much different than mine--more competing and conflicting issues; what he thinks is good for the faculty in the department may not be the same as my view. but we don't share the same perspective. the dean's level is different than the chair's--again, more competing and conflicting issues; same difference in what is good for the faculty. same at the provost's level, and so forth. i think this change in perspective is inherent, but some forget there is a change of perspective and that at each level the perspective gets more complicated.

__________________
Stephen Judd's #2 Groupie

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: In love
"Stephen, will you marry me? Oops. I'm already married to a really great person.
You are one smart cookie, but better than that, you are wise."


Mr. Wonderful, are you accepting nominations for a lifetime achievement award?
I'd like to nominate Prof. Judd.

__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: In love
"Stephen, will you marry me? Oops. I'm already married to a really great person. You are one smart cookie, but better than that, you are wise."

awww . . .  (blush).


 



__________________
Emma

Date:
Permalink Closed

wait a minute - I believe I am Stephen Judd's Risk Manager, PR Spokesperson, #1 Groupie, Life and Liberty Holder, Housekeeper in an Instant, Lady of the Dance, and any other title that I may be forgetting at this pivotal moment in Stephen's and my lives!!

__________________
Perspective, Please

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen--as i said last night i think we agree on 90+% of issues. the better administrators don't forget that they are still faculty members, and many plan to return there. many teach--they interact with students, direct student work, etc. (and i'm not talking thames). but one thing i've learned is that the view changes as you move up the organizational hierarchy--i have a view of things as a faculty member. my chair's view of my department is probably much different than mine--more competing and conflicting issues; what he thinks is good for the faculty in the department may not be the same as my view. but we don't share the same perspective. the dean's level is different than the chair's--again, more competing and conflicting issues; same difference in what is good for the faculty. same at the provost's level, and so forth. i think this change in perspective is inherent, but some forget there is a change of perspective and that at each level the perspective gets more complicated. "



I think this is the real problem -- one of perspective. The foundations of academia are very similar to the foundations of the democratic republic in which we live. Rule comes from the bottom up, not from the top down. If an administrator's perspective is different than a regular faculty member's perspective (for whatever reason), then therein is the problem. Faculty should govern and select esteemed members to serve as administrators. We have some of that at USM still. However, we have far too many career administrators in our midst. Imagine if the IHL had listened to faculty when filling the void that was eventually filled by our current president...he'd still be in Polymer Science and we may not have had the tumultuous three years under his reign of terror.

__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen--as i said last night i think we agree on 90+% of issues. the better administrators don't forget that they are still faculty members, and many plan to return there. many teach--they interact with students, direct student work, etc. (and i'm not talking thames). but one thing i've learned is that the view changes as you move up the organizational hierarchy--i have a view of things as a faculty member. my chair's view of my department is probably much different than mine--more competing and conflicting issues; what he thinks is good for the faculty in the department may not be the same as my view. but we don't share the same perspective. the dean's level is different than the chair's--again, more competing and conflicting issues; same difference in what is good for the faculty. same at the provost's level, and so forth. i think this change in perspective is inherent, but some forget there is a change of perspective and that at each level the perspective gets more complicated. "

I agree with you wholeheartedly here. Now that I am a director (interim, thank you) I not only have a different set of interactions with my faculty, but I also have a different view of my unit that comes from the fact that I am responsible for it well being and performance . . .  and of course I also am working with a different set of people at the management level and different degree and type of information . . . . my administrative work tends to isolate me both because I am away at more meetings and because there is just so much of it . . .  so I definitely have to work hard to keep my perspective and remember where I came from. You are so very right.


I'm not sure how much more difficult it would be if I had accepted this position for the long run -- or as an entry into administration. I suspect that would make it more complicated as I think it would be difficult to resist finding ways to cozy up to those who can help your career.


I do believe, however, that there are people who do enter administration for at least some of the right reasons and do manage to keep that perspective, albeit with struggle.


My faculty helps a lot -- I like them very much, depend on them to bail me out and they do great work.



__________________
Stephen Judd's #2 Groupie

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Emma
"wait a minute - I believe I am Stephen Judd's Risk Manager, PR Spokesperson, #1 Groupie, Life and Liberty Holder, Housekeeper in an Instant, Lady of the Dance, and any other title that I may be forgetting at this pivotal moment in Stephen's and my lives!!"


Well, it's easy to get carried away in times like these. Emma, don't become a war bride, just because Stephen is at the front.

__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Emma
"wait a minute - I believe I am Stephen Judd's Risk Manager, PR Spokesperson, #1 Groupie, Life and Liberty Holder, Housekeeper in an Instant, Lady of the Dance, and any other title that I may be forgetting at this pivotal moment in Stephen's and my lives!!"

Emma I'll be delighted to share the champagne with you on that day of liberation when all of us take to the streets (or halls, as it may be) and make like all those joyous crowds on VE day --


 



__________________
Emma

Date:
Permalink Closed

I might be more surprising in the front than you think. Oh, Stephen, please read this.

__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Stephen Judd's #2 Groupie
" Well, it's easy to get carried away in times like these. Emma, don't become a war bride, just because Stephen is at the front."

Yeah, I gotta admit I wish I were that other persona in real life . . . . . and I also wish I were better at following my own advice.


 


 



__________________
Emma

Date:
Permalink Closed

And, count on it, What might be about a 15 hr. drive by car, will be my NW ff miles at the last minute - about a 4 hour trip. Can't wait.

__________________
Cupid

Date:
Permalink Closed

My work is done here. Happy Valentine's Day everyone.

__________________
Sub-Admining is Fun! Close the portholes and dive!

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
"     I don't think my phrasing that "there are administrators" is restrictive. I was not addressing any theoretical subset of administrators who may have believed themselves to be on the faculty's side from the beginning. I also think it is possible that an administrator might believe himself/herself to be "on the side of" or sympathetic to faculty interests and yet not perceive that an administrator's view of what is good for the faculty and what the faculty believe is good for the faculty might not be the same. I think that difference in perception has informed our discourse throughout this last two years. I think it is important for administrators to remember that they are in a far better position to promote their own views of what constitutes good for the faculty than the faculty is -- they are in a much better position to actualize their views of what is ggood for the faculty as well -- because they have an access to the power to make chnage that faculty do not. What I had in mind in comment one is my belief that many of the new deans came in not fully convinced that things here were as bad as some faculty members portrayed the situation to be. Those administrators continued to act as though they could, in effect, soften some of the rougher edges of an administration they did not necessarily see as out of control. (I'm not completely convinced that some administrators actually started out agreeing with the administration that the problem was that the faculty is out of control). I think that (before the parens) was a fair position to have had -- things here were so bad it must have been almost unbelievable to contemplate any administration could be as brutal as this one was portrayed as being. My belief -- and what I want to assert to those on the board who might want to hang anyone above a certain rank no questions asked -- is that I think it is possible in a theortetical sense that some of those administrators have migrated to a different point of view -- having experienced how capricious this administration often is in its actions and how fundamentally unchangible it is even if some of its individual actions have been to retreat when confronted. I want to remind a few people that it wasn't all that long ago that there were people on this faculty who said terrible things about Myron Henry when he was Provost. I think we have learned since that not only was the relationship between then Provost Henry and Horace Flemming professionally complicated, but that MYron has since been a true champion for the ideal of what constitutes a university and for the role of faculty in academic affairs and governance. Now, having said that, I'll also agree that nothing that happened under Flemming remotely compares to the disaster that this administration has caused us -- complete with its inhumane treatment of many of its own faculty and staff. You last couple of paragraphs actually support my point -- I believe that there are administrators who are trying to both hang on to their jobs and do the right thing in a very difficult situation. I am not going to be the one to say they all should quit -- that is a decision only they are capable of making, whatever I want. On the other hand  -- some of these administrators are paid very well for their work so I also think it is a very thin line between continuting to collaborate and carry out the orders of an administration that truly is out of control while believing that your presence and your presence alone can hold back the effect of the worst of these decisions on the faculty. I think that thag kind of thinking conmveniently ignores the impact a deanor other high administrator could have with a very public resignation citing reasons. But once again, we all have to feed our familes and make a living and I'm not about to tell someone they should put themselves in that kind of jeopordy. After all, I'm still working here too -- so we are all compromised to some degree. And that is my chief point. Very few of us are completely pure here. There is a world of difference between those who are trying to climb the ladder full speed ahead and damn the bodies left behind and those who are trying to figure out how to survive intact and do the least harm possible -- and maybe be in a position to do some good. I'm not prepared to make that decision for an administrator and say what he/she should do -- but I'm also not prepared to accept at face value that we have a lot of closet idealists around the center of power . . . I think a certain amount of skepticim is necessary. Sorry this post is so long -- my thinking about why people do things and what informs their actions tend to be pretty contingent, I'm afraid, and very relativist. I'm don't apoligize for the "Us" vs "them"  quality of the post. We are all human beings and creatures of God, that is sure. But a rabbit is going to be really dead rabbit if it takes the line that the bobcat it sees in the brush is a mammal and hence, being like himself a mammal, doesn't pose a danger. He's going to have a chnace of survival if he also notes that though a mammal, this particualr mammal has long teeth, eats meat, and is fast as hell. Those who have the least power have to think in us vs them terms in order to survive. Once we have established an agreement that enables us to survive, we can begin to discuss our similarities. It as in the hope that we might be reaching that point in which survival might not necessaily be an every day risk that I wanted to open up a dialogue about the Post Shelby era and how to conceive  of it. I'm going to dinner.  "

SCM and Stephen:


What do you call a mouse training to be a rat? An assistant dean.


If you think that most rats and mice (or at least the chairs through deans I have chatted with) were ever under any illusion about this administration's glaring shortcomings, allow me to disabuse you of the notion. Quitting and joining the ranks sounds good, but simply hanging in and doing the job right (or as best as possible) under very difficult circumstances until fired for actual or perceived transgressions is probably a sweeter way to go out (but not good for the ulcers).


Yes, Stephen, individual motivations vary, as well as style. The integrity and backbone and responses among the rodents is quite variable, and all tales will be told in the fullness of time. However, I wouldn't make too much of this. Almost all admin types I know consider themselves faculty first. Some are jerks, and will be jerks again when they move on or rejoin the ranks. Most are no different than you, and realize that all power is temporary and that power needs to be tempered with wisdom and used to advance the interests of our colleagues and students... Foolish mistakes will be made. But as I have said to freinds and colleagues, if anyone is anxious to take up my seat, feel free to give it a shot. I'd love to Monday morning quarterback for awhile! 


   


 



__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

what a thread to respond to now. as i watch sleepless in seattle with my wife. stephen has groupies who want to marry him. i'm a geezer about to be married (to the same person) for a quarter of a century this spring. subadmin probably sums it up about as well as anyone. back to sleepless in seattle.

__________________
Cossack

Date:
Permalink Closed

Stinky Cheese Man is right. Administrators that go along with a bad president and do bad things to faculty are not who we need to help turn this place around. Most of them are of questionable character as academics and as people. Talk about them crossing over is nonsense; they cannot cross over because they will not change. Moreover, they will cross back as soon as they perceive a chance. The difference between Doty and the rest is that Doty did not want the job badly enough to work in the Thames sewer. The rest would continue carrying water for Thames as long as he could reward them. Those who even think about accepting such people back deserve what they will get. At best they are naive, or have learned nothing about people over their life. Except for Dean Doty, there is not one of the present academic administrators I would trust unless I was holding a gun on them. Of all of the things that have happened under this administration, nothing has depressed me as much as reading these posts about forgiveness. Before long we will be proposing a tent revival on the lawn where everyone can get saved, and we can hold hands and sign Shall We Gather At The Dome.

__________________
Sub-Admining becomes even more fun!

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Cossack
"Stinky Cheese Man is right. Administrators that go along with a bad president and do bad things to faculty are not who we need to help turn this place around. Most of them are of questionable character as academics and as people. Talk about them crossing over is nonsense; they cannot cross over because they will not change. Moreover, they will cross back as soon as they perceive a chance. The difference between Doty and the rest is that Doty did not want the job badly enough to work in the Thames sewer. The rest would continue carrying water for Thames as long as he could reward them. Those who even think about accepting such people back deserve what they will get. At best they are naive, or have learned nothing about people over their life. Except for Dean Doty, there is not one of the present academic administrators I would trust unless I was holding a gun on them. Of all of the things that have happened under this administration, nothing has depressed me as much as reading these posts about forgiveness. Before long we will be proposing a tent revival on the lawn where everyone can get saved, and we can hold hands and sign Shall We Gather At The Dome."

Cossack-


I think you misinterpreted SCM's response to my post (wake up SCM, no more snuggling with the wife!). It's not important to me whether you "accept" me back; in fact it is irrelevant, because I have never gone. There is nothing I have to ask forgiveness for (at least not on this campus), and the tales that will be told may make you despise some of us, but be proud of others. Brutish Cossacks massacred most of my ancestors under the Czars' despotic reign. Cossack is a good name for you.   



__________________
Cupid

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"what a thread to respond to now. as i watch sleepless in seattle with my wife. stephen has groupies who want to marry him. i'm a geezer about to be married (to the same person) for a quarter of a century this spring. subadmin probably sums it up about as well as anyone. back to sleepless in seattle."


Stinky Cheese Man, a romantic? I am impressed.

Happy Valentine's Day to Mrs. Stinky Cheese.

__________________
Invictus (aka Pollyana)

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Cupid
"Happy Valentine's Day to Mrs. Stinky Cheese."


Wouldn't she be properly addressed as "Stinky Cheese Ma'am"?




__________________
«First  <  1 2 3  >  Last»  | Page of 3  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> dean of COAL
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard