I will defend Dr. Thames - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 8, 2005

I will defend Dr. Thames

Date: Mar 8, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by: W.J. Johnson
". . . Dr. Thames built the USM polymers program from the ground up. . . ."

And he's tearing the rest of the University down to the ground.

" . . . Dr. Malone is a fine example. I've posted here before that I believe he will make a fine President some day, and continue to believe that Southern's executive seat is in his future. . . . "

The only executive seat in Kenbot's future might be the porcelain throne in SFT's wing of the polymer palace.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

You're not informed if you give credit to Shelby for the Trent Lott Center. He did everything he could to derail that project and nearly succeeded.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

W.J. Johnson, AKA Lamont Cranston, is upset with what he calls the lack of support for SFT. I disagree with his statement. Many of us have supported moving his fat butt from President to Professor emeritus. We have supported his move from President to a rocking chair at the old folks home. Some have supported his move to hell to take over the research operation ongoing there. A contingent of us would underwrite the financing to support shipping him to Iraq to develop a new school of Polymer Science at the University of Iraq and Points East. Indeed, most of us would support him in any endeavor that would get his rotund body away from Hattiesburg.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

My brother Utterly would just say this:

Ridiculous.

I'll go on to say that anyone who is named to the faculty and thinks something to behold is a "site" should take advantage of the "whiners" in Liberal Arts and learn to use the language.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

I probably have started drinking too early in the evening, but can someone tell what the heck the boy named Otterly said? By the way, can you believe that there was a moma so hard up to find a name for her boys, she named them Otterly and Utterly?

Date: Mar 8, 2005

I think Otterly was referring to Professor Dr. W.J. "Sycophant" Johnson's reference to the Sorority Village being a "site" to behold. Actually, I think Otterly might be Utterly off-base as the "site" could be a "sight" to behold. Or the "sight" might be a "site" to withhold. It would've helped at Otterly "cited" the sentence, before issuing the citation.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

I don't need my brother speaking for me. W.J. is ridiculous. Utterly Ridiculous. And the "site" might be something to behold, but the reference was not to the site but to the MODEL of the village.

QUOTED: The model for the new sorority village is quite a site to behold.

I hope that clears up why I agree with Brother Otterly that W.J. misused the language. And this is only the most egregious error, not the only one.

As for Mama naming us as she did, it could have been worse. Governor Hogg of Texas named his only daughter Ima. (Contrary to popular belief, she did not have a sister named Ura). Miss Ima Hogg was a wonderful woman, a patron of the arts in Texas (her home is now part of the Houston Museum of Modern Art), and the founder of the Ima Hogg Foundation which helps children and adolescents with mental illness in the state of Texas. As you will frequently hear in Houston: "Miss Ima Hogg. She was an angel." Leave Mama alone.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

I think Invictus may have started drinking before I did. Nonetheless, I agree with what he said.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
"I think Otterly was referring to Professor Dr. W.J. "Sycophant" Johnson's reference to the Sorority Village being a "site" to behold. Actually, I think Otterly might be Utterly off-base as the "site" could be a "sight" to behold. Or the "sight" might be a "site" to withhold. It would've helped at Otterly "cited" the sentence, before issuing the citation."

I am happy to inform the posters on this board that my firm has been retained to design a clear polymer bellybutton for Shelboo. This is to facilitate Professor Johnson's view of the rest of the world.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

I am sorry Utterly, I should not have talked bad about your Moma. Your Moma sounds like a wonderful woman. The next time you see her you should give her a big hogg. I mean hug.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: W.J. Johnson
"...Dr. Thames built the USM polymers program from the ground up. It now rests as one of the top 4 or 5 in all of the nation. That is remarkable. What other programs at Southern can boast such a fine ranking? I would say no others do...."

Actually, those rankings are over 10 years old. USM's polymer program is no longer ranked in the country. 10 years ago, USM's music, nursing, and creative writing programs were also nationally ranked. Where is their credit?

If anyone is showing “pettyness [sic] and professional jealousy” it is Thames not wanting to share credit with other programs across campus.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Plexiglas Salesman
"

I am happy to inform the posters on this board that my firm has been retained to design a clear polymer bellybutton for Shelboo. This is to facilitate Professor Johnson's view of the rest of the world."

Salesman,

Make it a bay window. Shelboo has the room for one and it will accomodate the crowd at Thursday's meeting who will need to be able to see out while they have their 250 collective heads up his a$$.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

Some of you are suggesting that Dr. Thames may have gotten polymers ranked highly, but let the rest of the university fall. This is not true. USM is currently ranked among the top universities in the U.S. in the Carnegie rankings. And the Carnegie rankings judge overall quality of schools. This kind of misinformation is all too common here on this board.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
"I think Otterly was referring to Professor Dr. W.J. "Sycophant" Johnson's reference to the Sorority Village being a "site" to behold. Actually, I think Otterly might be Utterly off-base as the "site" could be a "sight" to behold. Or the "sight" might be a "site" to withhold. It would've helped at Otterly "cited" the sentence, before issuing the citation."

Invictus - you surprise me. You said you weren't a liberal arts major. Yet your interpretation sound just like my college English professor interpreted works of literature.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

Finally!

At last, someone has stepped up and made an attempt to list something positive that SFT has done as president of USM! I applaude your effort, W.J.!

You're right - SFT did build Poly-Sci up into a nationally-ranked program. Please understand, I am in no way trying to take away from this major accomplishment of SFT's - UMS's Poly-Sci Dept. is one of the best in the country and SFT was the major driving force behind it becoming that. I do believe that if you were to review some of the previous posts on this and the old FireShelby board, you would find that there are many that also give him full credit for this accomplishment, as well as his reputation as an excellent research scientist. However, I do have to note that Shelby DID NOT single-handedly build the Polymer Science Program from the ground up during his tenure as president. This happened many, many years before 2002.

As far as the baseball complex goes, again I will give him full credit for his efforts and donations to that effect. However, again, it DID NOT happen while he was president.

As far as enrollment goes - nothing personal, but USM's enrollment numbers have been steadily climbing for the past 25 years or so. They did so under Dr. Lucas and Dr. Fleming and they are doing so under SFT as well. Yes, there have been some "off years" where they went down, but then they just bounced right back up there. Why? Because the POPULATION of south Mississippi and the surrounding areas has also been STEADILY GROWING. So again, nothing personal, but I think that USM's enrollment numbers would grow even if Mickey Mouse were president. In truth, we won't know what effect the SACS probation debacle has on enrollment until this August. However, if you want to see some really phenominal enrollment growth, just look at today's Hattiesburg American - William Carey College is blowing the doors off, and quite a few former USM professors are helping them to do it.

Was SFT the force behind the Trent Lott Center? Seriously, I don't know the answer to this, but I have to think that it was more than just him that was involved. Even so, it remains to be seen as to whether or not this will actually become a benefit to USM. Until the SACS probation issue is resolved, a true Economic Development program cannot be put into place. As far as other buildings & grounds improvements go, I will concede that point to you . . .

. . . with the exception of the new Sorority Village. I do believe that there will be a hotly contested debate about that because a very strong case could now be made that USM is about to engage in discrimination against older, or less advantaged, or married, or single-parent students. Or all of the above. Let's wait until the ACLU has weighed in on the issue of housing for these students before we see if any groundbreaking actually takes place.

Concerning the foodservice improvements, I will leave that up to the students' stomachs to decide.

If SFT was truly responsible for the new tech company comming to Hattiesburg, then hat's off to him. However, will this company's arrival actually have a huge effect on USM's ability to educate or it's quality of education? I thought that it was the faculty and the school's resources that directly affected these things? Certainly, there may be an apprenticeship program that is put into place, along with some donation money, but how can this company make up for faculty members that have been lost, over 200 to date?

Date: Mar 8, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: W.J. Johnson
"Some of you are suggesting that Dr. Thames may have gotten polymers ranked highly, but let the rest of the university fall. This is not true. USM is currently ranked among the top universities in the U.S. in the Carnegie rankings. And the Carnegie rankings judge overall quality of schools. This kind of misinformation is all too common here on this board."

The Carnegie classifications are based on the number of degrees awarded:

Doctoral/Research Universities—Extensive: These institutions typically offer a wide range of baccalaureate programs, and they are committed to graduate education through the doctorate. During the period studied, they awarded 50 or more doctoral degrees per year across at least 15 disciplines.

The Carnegie classification has nothing to do with quality (although Shelby throws out the term like it does ..... perhaps he doesn't know, either).

USM has been on the bubble for years because of the large number of educational doctorates it awards compared to the doctorates in other disciplines. We're likely to lose our Research Extensive classification if we can't keep turning football coaches into docs.....

So, Mr. Johnson.....if yer gonna join our faculty...get yer facts straight before ya start learning them students...

Date: Mar 8, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by: row faster, Ben Hur

USM has been on the bubble for years because of the large number of educational doctorates it awards compared to the doctorates in other disciplines

A glance at the graduation booklets will confirm this. We find it embarassing to examine that booklet during commencement.

Date: Mar 8, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: row faster, Ben Hur
" ... USM has been on the bubble for years because of the large number of educational doctorates it awards compared to the doctorates in other disciplines. ... "

Actually, I don't find this to be such a problem, we are supposed to be the primary teacher education college in the state.

This would be an interesting question to put to the business leaders that want to run USM, what about the education program at USM? It does not fit into the tech model that many seem to want. Who should take over this role in the state?

Date: Mar 9, 2005

Dear W. J. Johnson,

Even if you are a hoaxster (as I have come to believe), you have done what no "serious" defender of Shelby has even tried to do, so we all owe you a debt. I hope that others, with better knowledge of USM, will address each point of your post. I'll make an effort here to address them as best I can. I'll put my replies in bold.

"Several of you are picking on posters who support President Thames, daring them to list positive things he has done. I will do so here. I hadn't planned on doing this tonight, but do feel the need to now. Please pardon me if some things are left out in haste.

"Dr. Thames built the USM polymers program from the ground up. It now rests as one of the top 4 or 5 in all of the nation. That is remarkable. What other programs at Southern can boast such a fine ranking? I would say no others do. Dr. Thames' students have gone on to have successful careers and are making a difference. Dr. Malone is a fine example. I've posted here before that I believe he will make a fine President some day, and continue to believe that Southern's executive seat is in his future."

No one questions Shelby Thames's qualifications as a polymer scientist. Indeed, many of us wish he was back in his lab. We do, however, question both his qualifications to be, and his record of service as, A UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT. It's much easier to manipulate molecules than to lead and inspire people, as SFT has amply demonstrated in a very short time.

"Dr. Thames gave a substantial amount of money to construct the USM baseball complex that retains his name next to Pete Taylor Park. It is a truly world class facility. I have traveled to away games to support Coach Palmer in the past, and have never seen a facility quite as nice."

Again, if SFT were back in his lab, he could make lots more money to donate to any cause he wanted to support. Once more your comment does not address his demonstrated success (or lack thereof) as a LEADER OF AN ACADEMIC COMMUNITY. If he were the University's chief fund raiser or chief athletic booster, there might be a better fit.

"Under Dr. Thames' leadership, Southern's enrollment has continued to grow. This has happened even with all of the rumors and naysayers on campus. New facilities are going up all over campus, with the recent groundbreaking for the Trent Lott Center being the most recent accomplishment in this arena. Food service is improved, something I witnessed first hand during my recent visit to campus. The model for the new sorority village is quite a site to behold. These are just a few examples."

Others are better qualified to address these points. I would only echo what an earlier poster said: USM's enrollment has been rising steadily for years. I assume new construction has also taken place on campus under the tenure of previous presidents, without, however, all the turmoil and embarrassments that SFT's reign has cost.

"I also believe that the technology company that recently chose to locate in Hattiesburg made that decision because Dr. Thames and others like him in USM's science and technology areas are there in Hattiesburg. That company's decision is making waves in the state's media, and people I associate with on the coast say to a man that Dr. Thames made that happen. I agree."

Others are better qualified to address this point. Did SFT need to be USM's President for this to happen? Perhaps he would be better qualified as a full-time technology recruiter. Mississippi would thus get the benefits of his talents as a recruiter without the turmoil created by his ineptness as a president.

Scott Ross remark that Thames is a progressive leader hit the nail on the head.

A truly progressive leader would have the support of his faculty, or at the very least the support of a sizable portion of the faculty. SFT has lost -- again and again and again -- votes of confidence by overwhelming majorities of the faculty and their representatives.

Many of the supporters of Dr. Thames are appalled at the lack of support he gets on the campus. Those no confidence votes were no less than treacherous. Those two professors in the arts and letters got what anyone in the private sector would have faced for the disloyalty they showed. You wanted your list. Here it is, and this is an abbreviated version. I'm sure a much longer one will be on display in Hattiesburg this Thursday night. I would hope you all will move beyond the pettyness and professional jealousy from here on.

The no confidence votes are exactly what a savvy academic administrator would have expected -- but then, no savvy academic administrator would ever act in all the ways SFT has acted. A university is a community of scholars; it is not a "private sector" business. It is dedicated to higher ideals than money-making. SFT violated, and continues to violate, many of the deepest values of a scholarly community. In addition, USM is not a "private sector" business in another sense -- it is a publicly-held trust. It is therefore not a place that should be characterized by nepotism or cronyism, which have been hallmarks of SFT's regime. If a privately-held company (such as Klumb Lumber) wants to practice nepotism and cronyism, fine, but USM is not a private playground for SFT to with as he wishes.

Thanks again for at least making an effort to defend SFT, which is much more than we have come to expect from most of the pro-Shelbyites who turn up on this board.

Date: Mar 9, 2005

In addition, USM is not a "private sector" business in another sense -- it is a publicly-held trust. It is therefore not a place that should be characterized by nepotism or cronyism, which have been hallmarks of SFT's regime. If a privately-held company (such as Klumb Lumber) wants to practice nepotism and cronyism, fine, but USM is not a private playground for SFT to with as he wishes.

Speaking of hitting the nail on the head.

Date: Mar 9, 2005

Any more responses to the good Dr. Johnson?

Date: Mar 9, 2005

Re-posted from another thread:

: Backfield in Motion

Date: 1 hr, 18 min. ago
Views: 49

Quote | ReplyRE: Mader "pleased" with Johnson

The only times that this administration has been beaten is when their dirty dealings have been exposed to the sunlight. This is not the time to chase our tails at the beck and call of the fictitious Johnson who may or may not be trying to frame arguments, divide and conquer faculty, or play mind games with the website community.

Instead, focus on what has been successful in the past and expose the lies.

Here are some to think about:

Thames as the master fundraiser? No, in fact as recently as last week he delivered a speech to his FOUNDATION board and once again repeated his mantra that there are only three ways for a university to get money: state appropriations, tuitions and grants. HIS JOB should primarily be one of DEVELOPMENT yet, like accreditation, it is an area that he has almost completely ignored. Why? Because he doesn't have the skills. Additionally, his focus on grants as a source of revenue is simply illigitimate. Grant funding has many benefits to a university but a revenue source is not one. He is either being deliberately deceitful or he doesn't understand. Implicated or incompetent becomes irrelevant becasue both are grounds for dismissal.

Steadily increasing enrollment? No, in fact exclusive of the fiasco in fall, 2003 and the continued misrepresentations since then (as recently as yesterday if you read Klumb's words carefully) enrollment growh as a percentage of enrollment growth in the state is down. The <.5% is ludicrous. While Thames will try and point fingers at others, it is the continued turmoil, loss of faculty, and declining quality responsible for the university's abysmal performance. More important, is the transition from full to part-time students who have a significantly higher attrition rate.

Thames as the SACS savior? No, in fact it is his responsibility for dropping the accreditation ball in the first place, supporting poor decisions once the accreditation experts came in, and continuing to defy the spirit (if not the letter) of accreditation with behind the scenes interference like the upcoming political meeting. How many times have the faculty committees now been asked to revise SACS materials because Thames' appointees don't have a clear idea of what they're doing?

Thames as the driver of technology company recruiting to the state? No, in fact this is a public university and private recruiting is outside of the university's mission. Let him run a private technology park or work in the private sector as a lobbyist.

What about the nursing program? One more year of declining scores and it automatically loses accreditation? What is he doing about that other than sweeping it under the rug?

There's more, think about it. Meanwhile, what Johnson is trying to do is gain support of faculty by trying to create a turf war between the College of Business and Department of Economic Development. It's a divide and conquer strategy and it successfully kept the university community distracted last summer while Thames wrought havoc with his henchcrew.

Want to change the mission of this university? Want it to become more comprehensive, less comprehensive, more technology focused, more liberal arts focused, more of a research school, more of a teaching school, more focused on meeting the needs of students in this state, more focused on recruiting students from out of state....whatever, I truly don't care. It's not my decision but nor is it Shelby Thames' decision. This university needs some serious soul-searching and it needs it without Shelby Thames in the president's mansion. The kind of searching for a mission and subsequent development of a strategy that needs to be done CANNOT be done with someone who ignores the the fact that this is a university and needs to be run like one. Shelby Thames has been a disaster. Replace him with a temporary seasoned OUTSIDE administrator immediately and stop the downward spiral.

Let the light shine in.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: W.J. Johnson
"Several of you are picking on posters who support President Thames, daring them to list positive things he has done. I will do so here. I hadn't planned on doing this tonight, but do feel the need to now. Please pardon me if some things are left out in haste. Dr. Thames built the USM polymers program from the ground up. It now rests as one of the top 4 or 5 in all of the nation. That is remarkable. What other programs at Southern can boast such a fine ranking? I would say no others do. Dr. Thames' students have gone on to have successful careers and are making a difference. Dr. Malone is a fine example. I've posted here before that I believe he will make a fine President some day, and continue to believe that Southern's executive seat is in his future. Dr. Thames gave a substantial amount of money to construct the USM baseball complex that retains his name next to Pete Taylor Park. It is a truly world class facility. I have traveled to away games to support Coach Palmer in the past, and have never seen a facility quite as nice. Under Dr. Thames' leadership, Southern's enrollment has continued to grow. This has happened even with all of the rumors and naysayers on campus. New facilities are going up all over campus, with the recent groundbreaking for the Trent Lott Center being the most recent accomplishment in this arena. Food service is improved, something I witnessed first hand during my recent visit to campus. The model for the new sorority village is quite a site to behold. These are just a few examples. I also believe that the technology company that recently chose to locate in Hattiesburg made that decision because Dr. Thames and others like him in USM's science and technology areas are there in Hattiesburg. That company's decision is making waves in the state's media, and people I associate with on the coast say to a man that Dr. Thames made that happen. I agree. Scott Ross remark that Thames is a progressive leader hit the nail on the head. Many of the supporters of Dr. Thames are appalled at the lack of support he gets on the campus. Those no confidence votes were no less than treacherous. Those two professors in the arts and letters got what anyone in the private sector would have faced for the disloyalty they showed. You wanted your list. Here it is, and this is an abbreviated version. I'm sure a much longer one will be on display in Hattiesburg this Thursday night. I would hope you all will move beyond the pettyness and professional jealousy from here on. "

In light of recent discussions concerning the recent HA advertisement, and Dr. Thames many accomplishments as USM president, Professor Johnson's comprehensive post cataloging these achievements deserves re-examination. These distinctions have all been duly noted by the IHL board, and were emphasized by Mr. Klumb at their most recent closed session.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

And Klumb spoke to an executive session of the Board, eh?

When was that? February?

Robert Campbell