Call for a Boycott - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Feb 17, 2005

Call for a Boycott

Date: Feb 17, 2005

Topping idea, actually. I reckon Bob Mixon's Ford outlet would be a place to not buy. And avoid the Dews Foundry (I haven't been getting foundered much lately, though, so this may not help a lot. And no more Sanderson Farm's chicken. And what does B onnie Warren do? Something about paving, isn't it? Wouldn't take long to put together a working list, which could regularly be added to. Something like this happened years ago when a bunch of locals went to one of the last USM-UM football games in Jackson in a bus inscribed "Go to hell, Hardy High" on the side. As a result of that, one local cleaning establishment got the contract for the USM band uniforms yanked. They had to eat a lot of crow and adjust their politics to their pocket book. It could work. Certainly would attract some public attention. And every yahoo who publically protested would just go on the list.

Date: Feb 17, 2005

If you think the IHL will listen to anything now but forceful protest and marching in the streets you are wrong. THEY WILL RESPOND TO BOYCOTTS AND TO DEMONSTRATIONS. You can bank on it! Oops, that brings to mind that bank clerk who married well, BOBBY MIXON!

Date: Feb 17, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Kangaroo Court
"I call for a boycott of pro-Thames establishments and suggest giving our money only to pro-faculty establishments.

Pro-Thames establishments include:
ANYWHERE ON CAMPUS (yes, this includes Starbucks)
Purple Parrot Cafe/Crescent City Grill/Mahogany Bar
Mike Anderson's

Pro-faculty establishments include:
206 Front Street
JavaWerks
Sweet Pepper's Deli
Hardees

Please feel free to post others. When shopping, find out which side they're on and tell them why you're not shopping there again if they give the wrong answer. These townies with their heads up their a$$es must be made to suffer as we suffer. Make their lives miserable as a result of supporting Thames and they may decide to end the silence."

Why is Sweet Pepper's a pro-faculty establishment?

Date: Feb 17, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Question
"

Why is Sweet Pepper's a pro-faculty establishment?"

My enemy's enemy is my friend.

Date: Feb 17, 2005

Boycotting a car dealer or a CPA is one thing (and it probably evens out with the pro-Thames people they pick up.) I have a problem with boycotting restaurants because those are our students at work there. I would never set foot in Mahogany because of the clientele, but otherwise I'm not sure this is the right road to take.

BTW we've already had this argument a couple of times on this board.

Date: Feb 17, 2005

Also have never accomplished jack without a boycot.

Date: Feb 17, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"Boycotting a car dealer or a CPA is one thing (and it probably evens out with the pro-Thames people they pick up.) I have a problem with boycotting restaurants because those are our students at work there. I would never set foot in Mahogany because of the clientele, but otherwise I'm not sure this is the right road to take.

BTW we've already had this argument a couple of times on this board."

Yes, we have had this argument a couple of times, and weakness has won. I'm not saying boycott all restaurants, just ones friendly to Thames, and that's actually not many if you consider how many were against the bond issue.

I somehow recall G. Washington's Advisor's post about why faculty will lose against Thames, and I want to add your quote above to the reasons why.

You know nothing about how to fight these people. You're like Willem Dafoe's character in "Mississippi Burning" -- you aren't willing to do what it takes to see justice done. You're still fighting in columns while the administration snipes you guerrilla-style from the wilderness.

Date: Feb 17, 2005

Any "pro-Thames entity" boycott should include American Pride Paint. The paint may not smell but the actions of this administration do not pass the smell test.

Date: Feb 17, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Googler
"Any "pro-Thames entity" boycott should include American Pride Paint. The paint may not smell but the actions of this administration do not pass the smell test."

Actually, you should boycott any store that stocks this paint (if any actually stock it). Don't just avoid buying "soylent green" paint; avoid buying nuts, bolts, screws, nails, hot glue guns & chewing tobacco from stores that sell it. And let the manager know why. And then make sure the manager hears it from about 50 people a day.

But the truth is that boycotts don't succeed unless they are supported by significant numbers of people & are conducted over extended periods of time.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

How can you tell which businesses are "friendly" to SFT, as opposed to those who support the university? They don't have stickers on the front doors that read, "I support Shelby Thames". Also, why is Mike Anderson's on the boycott list? I really enjoy their fried shrimp.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

One of the posters asked the question, how do we know which businesses are Pro Thames. Ask, people know and will tell you.

Invictus is right, lets show the Hattiesburg community economic development in reverse. Hit em where it hurts, the profits. Let these businesses know from the get go that I will no longer shop/eat/ get my medical care from someone who supports this manical little tyrant. Show the community what it will be like if USM dries up and blows off into the sunset. Invictus is also right in the fact that a boycott isn't effective until its gone on for about a year. Think of the amount of money that will NOT be flowing into the community in a years time, especially if all of you there are participating. So you have to drive a little farther to shop/eat/get medical care from someone who believes that Thames is hurting USM, in the long run its well worth it.

It does have to be a concentrated effort on the part of the faculty and staff, and I do realize that some support Thames, that's their choice. But if you want to win the war, you have to take it one battle at a time. Small battles, well chosen battles to bring down the enemy. Know which battles to fight and which ones you can walk away from. You want to win, one you have to fight dirty, you have to know the enemies weakest spot and then keep hitting that spot, over and over again. Two, you have to be committed to winning the war, keep the pressure on the enemy, don't let up. This is going to digress a bit, but Thames says he can 'fix' the SACS problem, fine, dump it in his lap and walk away. I know what that means, but it would be one way to show the IHL and his supporters that he doesn't have a flippin clue. Say to him, You want to fix it, here be my guest, lets see how good a job you can do, but you won't get any help from me. I know its radical, I know what the long term results would be, but then when those results happen you can put the blame sqarely on Thames' shoulders and the IHL boards' shoulders.

Now, back to our reguarly scheduled topic......... boycotts are effective, very effective, they do however take time and patience to pull off. As I stated earlier, hit em where it hurts, the wallet, decrease their profits and yes, tell them up front, I refuse to shop/eat/get medical care here because you support the man who is destroying USM.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

Patti, the faculty senate already made its commitment to the IHL Board (in The Motion to begin a search for a replacement) that the faculty will work hard to remove USM from SACS probation. Don't forget, "our side keeps its word".

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: A Senator
"Patti, the faculty senate already made its commitment to the IHL Board (in The Motion to begin a search for a replacement) that the faculty will work hard to remove USM from SACS probation. Don't forget, "our side keeps its word"."

Four more years will be just fine and dandy.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: A Senator
"Patti, the faculty senate already made its commitment to the IHL Board (in The Motion to begin a search for a replacement) that the faculty will work hard to remove USM from SACS probation. Don't forget, "our side keeps its word"."

Senator,

Then I will respect that and support that. Just don't let that little creep take the credit for the hard work that the faculty is going to have done to save USM.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Patti
" Senator, Then I will respect that and support that. Just don't let that little creep take the credit for the hard work that the faculty is going to have done to save USM."

He will never give the faculty any credit, and any faculty member who gets any credit for getting USM off probation will get the knife in the back as quickly as Thames can carry it out.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: A Senator
"the faculty senate already made its commitment to the IHL Board (in The Motion to begin a search for a replacement) that the faculty will work hard to remove USM from SACS probation. Don't forget, "our side keeps its word"."

Senator, but yesterday the IHL did not announce the implementation of a search. Wasn't that a condition of "our side's" pledge?

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Hard Candy Christmas
"Senator, but yesterday the IHL did not announce the implementation of a search. Wasn't that a condition of "our side's" pledge? "

I don't think it was "a condition" since we are professionals employed by the Board. I didn't expect anything dramatic at yesterdays meeting. I expect that he will receive his annual evaluation by the Board, and if he hasn't found a face saving way out, they will announce a search for his replacement. We can renew this discussion then.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: A Senator
" I don't think it was "a condition" since we are professionals employed by the Board. I didn't expect anything dramatic at yesterdays meeting. I expect that he will receive his annual evaluation by the Board, and if he hasn't found a face saving way out, they will announce a search for his replacement. We can renew this discussion then. "

It is my understanding that the IHL didn't even acknowledge that they received the resolution.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

I might note that the "ignore the senators and they'll go away" strategy worked very well for Washington DC & it's MLB franchise...

Date: Feb 18, 2005

IMHO, and this goes along with LVN's post, I suggest to only boycott those who have spoken out for Thames. I don't think it's a very wise move on our part to basically corner a merchant and demand what side he/she is taking. (This is the impression I get from the posts here). I believe it will defeat the purpose and futher divide both camps. Many businesses have a policy, whether written or unwritten, that keeps them out of the "political arena" so to speak. I would hate to see a business ruined by the "Thames Inquisition" for giving "the wrong answer" when in fact they aren't too informed of the situation.

As far as Sweet Pepper's Deli,they spoke out against the bond issue and not the Thames issue, correct? Didn't Sir Walter Cain demand a boycott on this business?

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: ignore the senators and they'll go away
"It is my understanding that the IHL didn't even acknowledge that they received the resolution. "

From page 11 of this board, the thread "H.A. Out" has the following quote from the article:

""I can appreciate their concern for the university and their concern for the future direction of the university," Klumb said in response to the resolution. "I appreciate that they have positioned themselves to help us move forward for the resolution of the problems in regards to the accreditation issues."

Whether Thames, who took over as Southern Miss president in May 2002, gets a new contract next year remains to be seen, Klumb said."

Date: Feb 18, 2005

remember one poster suggested we not only boycott certain businesses but certain physicians. like i'm going to ask an oncologist, tell me where you stand on thames, or i'm going to ask an ER physician as i have a heart attack, don't treat me until i know where you stand on thames! gimme a break.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: MallRat
"IMHO, and this goes along with LVN's post, I suggest to only boycott those who have spoken out for Thames. I don't think it's a very wise move on our part to basically corner a merchant and demand what side he/she is taking. (This is the impression I get from the posts here). I believe it will defeat the purpose and futher divide both camps. Many businesses have a policy, whether written or unwritten, that keeps them out of the "political arena" so to speak. I would hate to see a business ruined by the "Thames Inquisition" for giving "the wrong answer" when in fact they aren't too informed of the situation.
As far as Sweet Pepper's Deli,they spoke out against the bond issue and not the Thames issue, correct? Didn't Sir Walter Cain demand a boycott on this business?"

I suggested the "corner a merchant" approach & I stick with it. I would regard an honest, "You know, I'm not sure" or "I've not given it much thought" answer as acceptable & an opportunity to do some friendly indoctrination. In fact, "I don't care, I'm an MSU grad" is OK in my book.

When one side uses restrictive "rules of engagement" to combat a foe that has repeatedly used a "no holds barred" philosophy, then the outcome has already been decided.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

This is a distraction, not the way to go. More will be lost than won in the court of public opinion and it will have zero impact on the college board. Don't surrender the current moral high ground by going petty.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

Of course if you or your children need to get their wisdom teeth out, it'd be a pretty easy task to know who to avoid.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

as an addendum to my previous post--if a physician asked where i stood on thames, i might get concerned.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

Hen,

Right on! Anyone posting on this board who proposes a boycott should be boycotted.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
stinky cheese man constructed the following stinky straw man & proceeded to knock it over:
"remember one poster suggested we not only boycott certain businesses but certain physicians. like i'm going to ask an oncologist, tell me where you stand on thames, or i'm going to ask an ER physician as i have a heart attack, don't treat me until i know where you stand on thames! gimme a break."

By all means if you have just been run over by a semi hauling hogs, you're first priority will be to find the nearest industrial-sized container of morphine. Shelby is inconsequential. But I do hope (and strongly suspect) that most of your medical consultations don't involve catastrophic illnesses or life-threatening emergencies.

For every heart attack you have, you are going to have a few dozen prostate exams or PAP smears, depending on the obvious. (Horrible thought, but true.) There's more than one urology clinic, more than one gynecologist available. If your ears are ringing, there's more than one ENT around. And if you need an oncologist, I hope to God you have the good sense to look out of town!

The notion that one must "do business" with particular physician for anything other than extremely rare or extremely urgent problems is misguided. Hell, most folks choose physicians because a neighbor or relative recommend them.

Date: Feb 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Stranger Than Fiction
"Hen,
Right on! Anyone posting on this board who proposes a boycott should be boycotted. "

I dunno if this is Mr. Wonderful territory, but it's a pretty good quote.

A boycott is too difficult to organize anyway & almost impossible to sustain. Ask Walt Cain.