PUC to be Dissolved - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 21, 2005

PUC to be Dissolved

Date: Mar 21, 2005

PUC was a charade anyway. Good riddance. In fact, we should be very honest and disband all committees that pretend to be about shared governance. In other words, shut the FS and all SACS committees down. FS should vote an historic "no confidence" in itself and all other faculty populated groups. Let's grind this train wreck to one last final halt. Time to play chicken with the IHL. It's us or SFT. We no longer report. You decide.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

The PUC was never more than an administration tool. Its agenda was set by the administration. Its meeting times were set. It functioned mostly as a way for the administration to deliver its spin and then to take questions based on that spin in order to obsfucate and or deflect critique. No university has a PUC for good reason. USM like other universities has a faculty senate, staff council, and student government. The administration works with all three constituents via those ELECTED bodies. If this administration follows the lead of communist and other authoritarian and anti-democratic models by refusing to work with elected bodies than it merely asserts its own view of leadership in so doing.
If the PUC is in fact to be dissolved than it marks another blow for democracy and the real spirit of universities as they continue to exist in the non-authoritarian world. Personall, I am not holding my breath on this rumor, or on this administration's ability to champion the ideals of western civilization and the principles on which such civilization is based, the principles universities in the west are supposed to champion. After all this IS mississippi.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

The original poster stated that AC/GC/FS would become impotent bodies in a second Thames term. I personally think that's a good thing. If Thames sinks or swims, it will be all of his own doing.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

The PUC was an example of the way that the faculty were able to turn Thames' PR plan against him. Rather than fighting (Metaphor Alert!) him head-on, many PUCers were able to expose additional lies, half-truths, and schemes in the context of the communication vehicle he created. Note that as the PUCers became more vocal, he changed meeting times, meeting agendas, meeting participants and proved himself weaker and weaker in doing so. Whether it should have been created in the first place is not as important as the fact that he may disband it now that he can't control it. One more failure.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

If this report is true, I wonder how Shelby will explain the dissolution of the PUC. Will he claim that it succeeded so brilliantly that it is no longer needed? Will he claim that it failed and blame the failure (as usual) on the faculty? Will he claim that it was sabotaged by The Resistance? It's always interesting to watch how he and his PR machine try to spin things.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

Perhaps, if this is true, Shelby has been told that he's not getting renewed. If so, there would be no reason to maintain the PUC charade and he could really blow off the faculty.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Makes Me Want to PUC
"at the close of this semester, the PUC will be dissolved. this info is from a source in the dome. with shelby's recent positive PR push, he reportedly no longer feels the need to continue dialogue with the "trouble makers." also, once off SACS probation, shelby will make AC/GC/FS completely advisory to him, meaning that he will do what he wants and will not listen to those bodies. again, this from a "coffee buddy" close to the gnome himself."

Your post seems to assume that Thames will get a second four year term from the Board.

How do you know that he will?

If Thames is planning to do these things as a lame duck, he's going to have an incredibly uncomfortable year before he has to leave.

Robert Campbell

Date: Mar 21, 2005

Another example of what is wrong with this administration:

It creates a committee to "communicate."

Then when it decides, and apparently with no or little consultation with the members of the PUC, it decides t abandon its own creations. I wonder if the administration ever considered that the members of the commmittee might have thigs they want to continue to communicate.

So much for "communication."

Date: Mar 21, 2005

Communication, as (mis)understood by Shelby Thames, is one-way and downward.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

Before you go too far with this thread, I suggest that this information be established as true. I for one would not mind the PUC being replaced with increased communication with the established faculty and staff bodies mentioned in the official handbooks, FS, AC, GC and SC.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

Reporter,

I agree.

Without corroboration, it's best to take the post at the top of this thread as pure FUD. All of sudden, we're getting a storm of it on this board.

Robert Campbell

Date: Mar 21, 2005

Reporter,

You hit the nail on the head. Don't believe these so called leaks from the dome. Most have been posted just to get the readers going (and it has worked). Let's not assume anything is true until we see it IN WRITING from a source with credibility - not a source who had coffee with an individual in the dome nor a friend of a friend.

NO QUARTER

Date: Mar 21, 2005

If I were a betting person, I would bet that NO leaks come out of the Dome, unless they are meant to. Who over there is willing to risk their job to convey the little items of gossip that show up here? I agree with RC, we're having a firestorm of FUD.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Amen Corner
"Reporter, You hit the nail on the head. Don't believe these so called leaks from the dome. Most have been posted just to get the readers going (and it has worked). Let's not assume anything is true until we see it IN WRITING from a source with credibility - not a source who had coffee with an individual in the dome nor a friend of a friend. NO QUARTER"

Good point -- I think I have warned about this myself lately . . . I should take my own advice.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

LVN. Yep, such leaks from the dome are undoubtedly purposive leaks just as we see/hear coming from Washington. "Informed sources" at the White House; "An unnamed source at the Capitol stated:... Every evening with the national news we hear leaks - ways of getting info out - often disinformation. Red flags should go up when we hear similar leaks on campus.

I do believe that in ole shelby's mind that as soon as SACS is behind him, he will stop all forms of communication with all constituents. I also believe as others do that if shelby is allowed to continue as prez, there will be "H*** to pay" and he will go after tons of people. Keep those CVs polished and get networking. If we have thought the past few years have been bad, there will get even worse.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

What does he plan to do about SACS scheduled visit next year?

Date: Mar 21, 2005

I will note the day. Today is the day I said this would happen. All of you doubting Thomases will be reminded when PUC is dissolved as outlined in my first post.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Makes Me Want to PUC
"I will note the day. Today is the day I said this would happen. All of you doubting Thomases will be reminded when PUC is dissolved as outlined in my first post."

MMWTP,

I hope you won't misinterpret that caution people are showing; it's an understandable reaction to disinformation ploys by the Shelbyites. If you are proven correct, everyone here will gladly admit it, and I will personally buy you a beer.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

Sympathizer,

Thanks. I realize that there has been some elevated troll activity lately. I would also like to say that every unsubstantiated rumor posted here is not troll activity, and that information is information regardless of whether we like it or not. If I could scan a copy of a memo in, it might be believed, but it could also cost me my job. However, this information came from an overheard conversation, so I cannot prove it to the board. You'll just have to wait and see.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Makes Me Want to PUC
"Sympathizer, Thanks. I realize that there has been some elevated troll activity lately. I would also like to say that every unsubstantiated rumor posted here is not troll activity, and that information is information regardless of whether we like it or not. If I could scan a copy of a memo in, it might be believed, but it could also cost me my job. However, this information came from an overheard conversation, so I cannot prove it to the board. You'll just have to wait and see."

Makes Me Want to PUC,

When I post something that is true I use a name that has attained respect on this board because of the veracity of the post. I sometimes even post under my real name. If I ever post rumor or hearsay, I present it as such and even use another name such as Rumor, etc. Your name is not one I recognize and so I would guess your information is not as reliable.

But that's just me. I don't know the habits of other posters.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

Not Officially "kicking" it but certainly don't want to see this pertinent arguement go away anytime soon. Many members on this board will understand and bloody KICK it to the top position.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Makes Me Want to PUC
"Sympathizer, Thanks. I realize that there has been some elevated troll activity lately. I would also like to say that every unsubstantiated rumor posted here is not troll activity, and that information is information regardless of whether we like it or not. If I could scan a copy of a memo in, it might be believed, but it could also cost me my job. However, this information came from an overheard conversation, so I cannot prove it to the board. You'll just have to wait and see."

Thanks, MMWTP. I am actually HOPING that your information is correct. If so, it would only confirm once more what we all know about Shelby's commitment to communication.

Date: Mar 21, 2005

I don't imagine there will be many on the council who would be sorry to find that MMWTP is accurate in the rumor. I, for one, am glad to be off the thing. I know others who wish they were as well. I do think those on it have, for the most part, done their best to turn the agenda to substantive topics and to hold the administration at least publicly accountable. A few things have been accomplished in spite of the 'spin' factor. But, I couldn't agree more with those who would rather see the communication taking place with the elected bodies on campus. We initially circulated a proposal to make the PUC an elected body (in the very early days of it), but were only able to get a compromise position that allowed elected representatives from FS, SC and SGA to join. To quote my dear friend Monique, c'est la guerre.