Mader is still here and has finally poked her head up to fend off Kevin Walters. She says that the letters should have stayed out of the media, etc. etc. and that we are all moving forward, ever forward.
The most telling lines in the story:
The Faculty Senate voted earlier this month to send a resolution to the board asking for a search to find a new president.
"This is what you get into when you have opposing forces that seem hell-bent on destructing one another," Klumb said.
So, there is the proof from Klumber - SFT is hell-bent on destroying the faculty.
I love Klumb's use of the English language! It's hard to believe that a guy with this kind of intellect is in charge of anything, let alone a state system of higher education.
Wasn't Thames calling for (strongly and frequently as I recall) for Glamser and Stringer to go public with their hearing? A personnel matter seems more appropriate to remain "in house" than a matter about goals and activities. I guess what he really means is, "matters which embarrass me should remain private, matters which embarrass faculty should be public." Is that about the gist if it?
"Southern Miss President Shelby Thames and interim provost Jay Grimes said disagreements about a program and research raised between officials should not have been made public, said university spokeswoman Lisa Mader."
"Last week, Grimes provided the Hattiesburg Americana copy of a letter..."
quote: Originally posted by: Outside Observer "Wasn't Thames calling for (strongly and frequently as I recall) for Glamser and Stringer to go public with their hearing? A personnel matter seems more appropriate to remain "in house" than a matter about goals and activities. I guess what he really means is, "matters which embarrass me should remain private, matters which embarrass faculty should be public." Is that about the gist if it?"
quote: Originally posted by: Internal Consistency ""Southern Miss President Shelby Thames and interim provost Jay Grimes said disagreements about a program and research raised between officials should not have been made public, said university spokeswoman Lisa Mader." "Last week, Grimes provided the Hattiesburg Americana copy of a letter..." Hmmm...."
This is a ridiculous case of CYA, and a not-very-good one at that. Basically, this says that Jay Grimes thought it was perfectly great to release that memo last week, but after SFT got a hold of him (i.e. put his leash back on), he's now saying that it was a bad idea to do it? What a spineless provost Jay Grimes is...I knew it was bad, but didn't realize it was truly this bad.
This is setting the stage for the "Doty gets censured" scenario that was floated here yesterday.
Who actually released the Grimes memo first? If the memo was sent from Grimes to Doty & if Grimes did not in fact release the memo (an internal communication between two individuals) himself to anyone but Doty, then this is not spin. Doty is on the hook & Shelby is off of it. It's beginning to look like Doty was baited.
Grimes can now be presented as a hard-nosed administrator trying simply to get a stonewalling dean to do his job. Doty can be presented as having "possibly broken state law" by releasing the memo containing protected personnel information. (If any other scum can be dredge up about him, we'll hear that, too.) And Thames can be praised for quickly responding to smooth over a sticky situation. I won't be surprised if Crofts even receives a mild reprimand for over-reacting in the press.
My bet is that that's going to be the line. And the board is going to buy it.
I am correcting myself. According to the article, Grimes "provided" the memo to the HA. Was this done of his free will or because Kevin Walters knew that the memo existed & might have been in a position to utter the magic acronym FOIA?
I still think today's statement is intended to set the stage for a big "Doty released the memo" turnabout.
quote: Originally posted by: Angeline "Here's the link: http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050215/NEWS01/502150302/1002"
"They believe that we need to move forward and not dwell on one issue that has been played out, unfortunately, in the media where an internal issue should not have been discussed or placed," Mader said Monday
So what about that statement that suggested that faculty might have engaged in "criminal" behavior? I wonder if the author of this letter thinks that statement should have been made publically.
If I hear the phrase "moving forward" one more time . . . . .
One can move forward off the edge of a cliff. One can move forward doing the WRONG thing. This simplistic notion that all change is good shows an incredibly unsophisticated mind.
__________________
Robert Campbell
Date:
RE: RE: HA: Letter should not have been public (Ma
quote: Originally posted by: Invictus "This is setting the stage for the "Doty gets censured" scenario that was floated here yesterday.
Who actually released the Grimes memo first? If the memo was sent from Grimes to Doty & if Grimes did not in fact release the memo (an internal communication between two individuals) himself to anyone but Doty, then this is not spin. Doty is on the hook & Shelby is off of it. It's beginning to look like Doty was baited.
Grimes can now be presented as a hard-nosed administrator trying simply to get a stonewalling dean to do his job. Doty can be presented as having "possibly broken state law" by releasing the memo containing protected personnel information. (If any other scum can be dredge up about him, we'll hear that, too.) And Thames can be praised for quickly responding to smooth over a sticky situation. I won't be surprised if Crofts even receives a mild reprimand for over-reacting in the press.
My bet is that that's going to be the line. And the board is going to buy it.
I want to puke.
"
Invictus,
The problem for Thames, Malone, and Grimes (and at least the first two would very much like to blame everything on Doty) is that Crofts has acted--and has ordered Thames to retract the memo.
How can the Board punish Doty, without punishing Crofts? And how can it punish Crofts, without endorsing Thames and Malone's plans?
Yet Klumb is quoted as saying that the Board doesn't want any new programs launched while USM is on probation with SACS.
I realize that the Board may not share my preoccupation with consistency, but still.... I get the impression that Mader is just back in town from job-hunting, Thames is getting desperate, and she is giving a half-hearted performance.
Robert Campbell
__________________
Invictus
Date:
RE: RE: RE: HA: Letter should not have been public
quote: Originally posted by: Robert Campbell "I realize that the Board may not share my preoccupation with consistency, but still.... I get the impression that Mader is just back in town from job-hunting, Thames is getting desperate, and she is giving a half-hearted performance."
I hope you're right.
I feel a lot better now that I've gotten something bland on my stomach.
Honestly, I can't remember the state of my lip when I uttered that statement. I was in a hurry to rush home for a peanut butter and banana sandwich for lunch. I assure you, I am not Elvis!
This is the whole point right here. The board trusted Shelby to do a job that he convinced them he could do -- an academic job -- and he failed them. He is not competent to do this particular job. He said he was going to run Southern Miss like a business, well his business has gone belly up by any and all academic industry standards. If he had understood the business of running a university he would have paid attention to academic rankings, to faculty flight, and to accreditation. In his quest for quantitative superiority, he ignored quality. Every college in the university has examples of his inattention to quality. The data from nursing just released is appalling. In his desire to show that he meant "business", he hired industry people who were clueless about universities. Their ineptitude reflects on him and the university community. Everyone is tired of him and the problems he has caused. If the IHL is ever going to make a decision, it must be now before all the people who could help the university recover are gone.
Sorry, I posted the above on the wrong thread. It was meant to follow Anne Wallace's comment, "Really, now, is it not time to acknowledge SFT's inability to do this particular job?" on the Crucial Moment thread.
On this thread, I guess what I wanted to add is that listening to another set of opening remarks by Rob McDuff, this time on the subject of what constitutes public policy concerns, could be very interesting.
quote: Originally posted by: Internal Consistency ""Southern Miss President Shelby Thames and interim provost Jay Grimes said disagreements about a program and research raised between officials should not have been made public, said university spokeswoman Lisa Mader." "Last week, Grimes provided the Hattiesburg Americana copy of a letter..." Hmmm...."
Do they really expect us to believe that if the letters were not made public Grimes and Thames would have changed their position? Do they really expect us to believe SFT would have denounced the two paragraphs in Grimes letter without having to be told to do so by Crofts? Obviously this is just propaganda for their supporters to hang onto in order to keep faith. Mader must have been very stressed to come up with that statement.
"Originally posted by: Internal Consistency ""Southern Miss President Shelby Thames and interim provost Jay Grimes said disagreements about a program and research raised between officials should not have been made public, said university spokeswoman Lisa Mader." "Last week, Grimes provided the Hattiesburg Americana copy of a letter..." Hmmm...."
Mader-spin for setting the stage for Klumb to state on Thursday at the IHL meeting that "the issue of the memo has been addressed and is no longer a problem at Southern Miss, let's let SFT get back to work"
quote: Originally posted by: The time is now "This is the whole point right here. The board trusted Shelby to do a job that he convinced them he could do -- an academic job -- and he failed them. He is not competent to do this particular job. He said he was going to run Southern Miss like a business, well his business has gone belly up by any and all academic industry standards. If he had understood the business of running a university he would have paid attention to academic rankings, to faculty flight, and to accreditation. In his quest for quantitative superiority, he ignored quality. Every college in the university has examples of his inattention to quality. The data from nursing just released is appalling. In his desire to show that he meant "business", he hired industry people who were clueless about universities. Their ineptitude reflects on him and the university community. Everyone is tired of him and the problems he has caused. If the IHL is ever going to make a decision, it must be now before all the people who could help the university recover are gone. "
This is the basis for an excellent letter TTIN. How about it?
__________________
No clothes
Date:
RE: RE: HA: Letter should not have been public (Ma
quote: Originally posted by: Green Hornet " quote: "Originally posted by: Internal Consistency""Southern Miss President Shelby Thames and interim provost Jay Grimes said disagreements about a program and research raised between officials should not have been made public, said university spokeswoman Lisa Mader." "Last week, Grimes provided the Hattiesburg Americana copy of a letter..." Hmmm...."
Mader-spin for setting the stage for Klumb to state on Thursday at the IHL meeting that "the issue of the memo has been addressed and is no longer a problem at Southern Miss, let's let SFT get back to work""
Klumb does this, and he is clearly "the emperor." That makes it fodder for someone to point out the lack of clothing.
__________________
Public responsibility
Date:
RE: HA: Letter should not have been public (Mader)
"This is what you get into when you have opposing forces that seem hell-bent on destructing one another," Klumb said.
Mr. Klumb: the forces opposed to the Thames administration are NOT trying to destroy each other; they are trying desperately to SAVE this university from the destruction caused by Shelby Thames and his cadre of academic incompetents. When will you understand that HE let you down by promising what he was incapable of delivering? If he were running one of your companies and your stock went down, your employee turnover rate (and subsequent cost of replacing and training) skyrocketed, your market share declined, your "goodwill" all but disapppeared, and your bottom line was eroded, wouldn't you fire him (now, not later)? Why do the people of Mississippi whom you represent deserve anything less?
Originally posted by: Public responsibility "This article appears in the Clarion Ledger today.
"This is what you get into when you have opposing forces that seem hell-bent on destructing one another," Klumb said. "
If I am not mistaken he used equally colorful language in a much earlier public comment. I believe it was something like "Damn the torpedoes . . . full speed ahead."