caterer's information - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 18, 2005

caterer's information

Date: Mar 18, 2005

BB,

Caterer's information has been so laughably bad that it really is hard to take him/her seriously. In fact, caterer is SO inept that I am almost beginning to wonder if he might be Shelby himself.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

big blue,

There was talk on this board about a protest at the Coca-Cola bottler when the Thames pep rally was first announced. But those who opposed demonstrating obviously prevailed, and there were no demonstrators ar Warren Paving, where the meeting actually took place.

I thought the rumors about the alleged protest at Drews' office first appeared in a Thursday article in the Independent, which in turn was cited on this board. And the Independent quoted Bonnie Drews...

There's a bit of a difference.

Robert Campbell

PS. Has Bonnie Drews denied any of the quoations that the Independent attributed to her? Or has she simply refused to talk to other reporters about them?

Date: Mar 18, 2005

Let's see. 185 people attended the asphalt meeting. Does that mean that if anything negative happens to any of those 185 people or any of their customers or clients, somehow a USM faculty member must have done it?

As far as I know, there have been no faculty protests off or on USM campus; indeed, the protests at the dome last Spring were led by students. I was in the group that planned the protests, and no faculty members were involved in the planning.

This rumor is nothing more than contrived "evidence" to support the lies at the asphalt meeting last week that faculty members are violent and dangerous. Perhaps a faculty boycott of those businesses represented at last week's meeting will be necessary, if for no other reason than to keep faculty members out of the dangerous position that something "bad" might happen at a place where they've shopped, and they might be blamed.

I guess if Shelby's Clan can't play fair, they'll play dirty. Making up lies about violent faculty members is indeed "playing dirty."

Date: Mar 18, 2005

Sympathizer,

Some of the info was really bad. I believe there is a kernel of truth in his story, though. Again, when I hear about the owner of the vandalized vehicle, so will you.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

I am a disgruntled student and I still would not resort to busting windows. As for hoodlums...I doubt they frequent this board. If you ask me the best suspect for something like that would be one of Shelby's goons trying to make it look like faculty...sorry but we are still the "good" guys.

On the other hand it could have just been a freak coincidence, if it even happened.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: FireShelby
" Perhaps a faculty boycott of those businesses represented at last week's meeting will be necessary, if for no other reason than to keep faculty members out of the dangerous position that something "bad" might happen at a place where they've shopped, and they might be blamed."

This is great!

Date: Mar 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: SaveUSM
"I am a disgruntled student and I still would not resort to busting windows. As for hoodlums...I doubt they frequent this board. If you ask me the best suspect for something like that would be one of Shelby's goons trying to make it look like faculty...sorry but we are still the "good" guys.

On the other hand it could have just been a freak coincidence, if it even happened."

I never called anyone on this board a "hoodlum." Please read my post carefully. One would think that educated persons would actually try to understand things before ripping a statement apart.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Big Blue
"

I never called anyone on this board a "hoodlum." Please read my post carefully. One would think that educated persons would actually try to understand things before ripping a statement apart."

Then I suggest you do the same. I was not saying you said anyone here was a hoodlum, I said I doubt hoodlums frequent this board and would not therefore be influenced to commit crimes against SFT supporters as you suggested in your original post. I was not ripping your statement apart (as I am now) I was suggesting that the true culprit might be an SFT goon.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Big Blue
"Sympathizer, Some of the info was really bad. I believe there is a kernel of truth in his story, though. Again, when I hear about the owner of the vandalized vehicle, so will you."

WHY do you believe there is a kernal of truth to this story? And what kernal? The fact that Boonie Drews says there was a faculty protest which so far NO ONE has confirmed and then an assertion from outer space that there was vandalism (first linked to the protest) and now simply in the same geographic area?

Some of the info was NOT "really bad." It was a lie.

Why are YOU so resistent to admitting that? If there was no protest (the evidence is far stronger that there was no such event than there was) -- then even if a car got vandalized so what?

I oppose the administration. If my car gets vandalized in the TAD parking lot should I then blame it on the administration?

But of course, you aren't really interested in that are you -- you really are just interested in stirring things up.

266-4995

TAD 201

Javawerks at 7 a.m. most any day.

Show up or shut up.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

Apologies...to the board...I withdraw my previous statement...I am not in the best mood today.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

please remember the usm situation is not the only controversy fred(dentist) is involved.

he recently brought suit against the city/developers concerning a medical building near his home. if i remember he won the zoning issue, but it still may be in litigation

Date: Mar 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
"
WHY do you believe there is a kernal of truth to this story? And what kernal? The fact that Boonie Drews says there was a faculty protest which so far NO ONE has confirmed and then an assertion from outer space that there was vandalism (first linked to the protest) and now simply in the same geographic area?
Some of the info was NOT "really bad." It was a lie.
Why are YOU so resistent to admitting that? If there was no protest (the evidence is far stronger that there was no such event than there was) -- then even if a car got vandalized so what?
I oppose the administration. If my car gets vandalized in the TAD parking lot should I then blame it on the administration?
But of course, you aren't really interested in that are you -- you really are just interested in stirring things up.
266-4995
TAD 201
Javawerks at 7 a.m. most any day.
Show up or shut up. "

You know, this is another reason why faculty isn't taken seriously. It's OK to pile on and take one side on an issue on this board, but when one takes an opposite side, you invite them to meet you "outside" for a discussion. You don't want to discuss it here.

I saud two things: 1) USM faculty members discussed having protests over the Warren Paving meeting, and 2) a car was vandalized in the Drews' office area. I asserted that, if I say publically I want to kill Shelby Thames and Thames ends up shot in the head, then I should expect to be a suspect.

If LA faculty say they didn't do it (protest or anything else), then I believe them.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Big Blue
" . . . when one takes an opposite side, you invite them to meet you "outside" for a discussion. You don't want to discuss it here."

Not true, Big Blue. There are NUMEROUS invitations to serious discussion scattered on posts across this board. Supporters of Shelby, though, almost always ignore the invitation to engage in genuine dialogue.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Big Blue
" You know, this is another reason why faculty isn't taken seriously. It's OK to pile on and take one side on an issue on this board, but when one takes an opposite side, you invite them to meet you "outside" for a discussion. You don't want to discuss it here. I saud two things: 1) USM faculty members discussed having protests over the Warren Paving meeting, and 2) a car was vandalized in the Drews' office area. I asserted that, if I say publically I want to kill Shelby Thames and Thames ends up shot in the head, then I should expect to be a suspect. If LA faculty say they didn't do it (protest or anything else), then I believe them."

1) You are correct, there was discussion, that is all the farther it went.

2) I'm sorry to hear about the car, however, I do not believe that ANY member on this board had ANYTHING to do with it. It could be a random act.

3) You would be correct in your assumption. But then you should also know what assume means, makes an ass out of you and me.

4) So far, what caterer has stated has been disproven, in other words he/she/it was lying.

5) When an article is printed about the vandilisim on this car, then the board will put faith in your statements.

6) For the most part blue, your posting style is of a troll, states supposed fact and then doesn't back it up, and when asked to do so gets their panties in a bunch.

Now, put up, meaning state fact that can be verified as fact, or shut up.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Big Blue
" You know, this is another reason why faculty isn't taken seriously. It's OK to pile on and take one side on an issue on this board, but when one takes an opposite side, you invite them to meet you "outside" for a discussion. You don't want to discuss it here. I saud two things: 1) USM faculty members discussed having protests over the Warren Paving meeting, and 2) a car was vandalized in the Drews' office area. I asserted that, if I say publically I want to kill Shelby Thames and Thames ends up shot in the head, then I should expect to be a suspect. If LA faculty say they didn't do it (protest or anything else), then I believe them."

The meeting outside has to do with actually verifying that the poster not only is not a poseur but because a conversation in person and over coffee tends to maintaina level of civility that it is difficcult to maintain on a board.

1) hdiscussion of warren praving protests have nothing to do with Bonnie Drew's husband's office

2) rthere has yet to be any indication that there was a protest at the Drews office

3) there has yet to be any indication that if there was such a protest the "liberal arts" faculty were involved"

4) there is yet to be proven there was vandalism

5? there has yet to be proven that the unproven vandalism was the prodouct of an unproven protest by an unproven group of liberal arts faculty.

What is not unproven is that you can pile a series of asseertions on top of one another and link them in linguistic sequence -- it does not prove they either exist or are related.

Ergo -- you are either a very bad logician (forgivable) or a troublemaker.

If troublemaking isn't an issue, I fail to see why you, or albert, or caterer won't meet with me. I am 5'7", slightly built and 54 years old and not prone to violence. What is it exactly you fear?

Date: Mar 18, 2005

yep -- I know the typos are bad in that last entry but I am working in between sessions of doing a budget on excel.

Date: Mar 18, 2005

Stephen, against all odds, your message will be heard. Take a look at you now, you have us standing here . . . we know your aim is true (oops, an Elvis Costello reference).

Date: Mar 18, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Emma
"Stephen, against all odds, your message will be heard. Take a look at you now, you have us standing here . . . we know your aim is true (oops, an Elvis Costello reference)."

Love that Elvis Costello! I'm stealing "my aim is true" for my own personal motto! Good taste, Emma!