Cute, EP.  In a way, you are right.  Anyone who comes to this board and thinks that it is about a "fair and balanced" view of the University of Southern Mississippi will be disappointed.  But don't go to the official USM website looking for impartiality either.

This is an advocacy board.  Most of us are here because we advocate the removal of Dr. Thames.  We are working for that.  No hidden agenda.  It is all open and above board.

There may be various opinions expressed.  Sometimes even a grudging allowance that something Thames has instituted is working.  But those will be rare because, in general, most of us believe he, his handlers and his minions are destroying the university that we love. 

We don't feel like we have to give the other side of the story. That seems to be what the USM Public Relations Department is for.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Didn't used to be cynical
"Here's an example.
I think that many of us might have agreed that the university needed to be reorganized, especially in the light of hard financial times. We would have disagreed on what would have been the best structure, but we would have arrived at a solution."

---

That's an excellent example, I think. I'd like to hear what others think about this. Is the issue really reorganization, or the fact that Thames rolled out the reorganization as a fait accompli, announcing it to the "bidness community" before the affected deans even knew it was coming down & not involving anyone outside his own "double secret advisory panel" in the decision? Was it a decision based 100% on solid thinking, or was it partially to "show them who's boss?"

Just my worth, but SFT's biggest failing has been how he goes about things. It's his self-centered, arrogantly autocratic style. Many of his blunders could have been avoided by simply getting some advise from people "out there where the rubber meets the road." But of course, that would be admitting that he doesn't know everything about everything. And his little world -- and this is the little world where folks like the Kenbot live -- admitting that one doesn't know everything about everything is an admission of weakness. This is, BTW, not a new development in SFT's zeitgeist. If someone had told me 35 years ago that SFT would one day be president of USM, I'd have asked them to share a little bit of what they'd been smoking...

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Invictus
"
Many of his blunders could have been avoided by simply getting some advise from people "out there where the rubber meets the road." But of course, that would be admitting that he doesn't know everything about everything.
"

---

This management style was apparent long before the reorganization. It has been known for years. The IHL must have wanted this.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: JoJo
"I thought a "the Academy" was a place for critical thinking and reviewing and discussing all sides to issues.  AAUP appears to only allow one viewpoint.  I see Ms. Dvorak divorce being ridiculed.  I thought Noel Polk was divorded also.  Why is that not being discussed?"

---

Damn, JoJo. Read the whole fricking thread. Discuss to your little heart's content. This ain't "the Academy."  It's a damn discussion board made up mostly of people who are sick and tired (and sick and tired of being sick and tired) of Shelby Thames and his sycophants.  Figure it out.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: JoJo
"I thought a "the Academy" was a place for critical thinking and reviewing and discussing all sides to issues.  AAUP appears to only allow one viewpoint.  I see Ms. Dvorak divorce being ridiculed.  I thought Noel Polk was divorded also.  Why is that not being discussed?"

---

Because Noel Polk was hired through a search. Because he did falsify his resume. Because he did not hire his unqualified spouse to force a good person out and his unqualified friend to hold a redundant position.

I'm sorry that the Dvoraks are divorced. But they haven't gotten anything they don't deserve.

Because he (noel polk) did NOT falsify his resume!

So this booard does not reflect the opinions of the "Academy"!!

When a search is conducted properly, background checks are routinely done before a person is hired. Anyone in academia all over the country knows what it means to earn tenure at a four year institution of higher learning. Ms. Dvorak did not do so, and her resume was designed to imply that she did. Why else to you think that SFT was told to jettison her from the VP position. He had to move her before she left USM for the ADP.
The AAUP asked Thames to respond to the resume. He refused to do so.

There is about a ton of discussion on these issues both on this thread and on the old Fire Shelby threads. We've been down this road about a hundred times already, bud. FYI, Dr. Dvorak MISREPRESENTED her tenure situation in Kentucky. However, when she was asked about it the first time, all she had to do was say "Oh, gosh. I didn't realise that was misleading, here's what really happened." No lies, no cover-up, no problem. We would have all been spared a world of misery if she had just been up front from the get-go.
Has nothing whatsoever to do with anybody else coming to USM.

She had the same tenure Dr. Cleere had in Mississippi

quote:

---

Originally posted by: JoJo
"Can we get your social security number and run a check on you?  Isn't that an invasion of privacy?  Did Glamser and Stringer do that?"

---

Anyone who listened to Dr. Stringer's testimony after the pig circus last spring would know that what you're saying isn't exactly what happened. And the information they obtained from the Kentucky board wasn't confidential at all. Someone with a higher tolerance for trollish ignorance will have to explain it to you, but I suspect you are immune to explanations.

Methinks that you're believing what Shelby's minions say uncritically, but requesting that we critically about anything anyone says that contracts him.

Dr. Cleere would have been tenured at USM without being on campus one day.  What is the difference?

So anyone on campus can get your social security number and check out anything they want to about another member of the "academy."  The End always justifies the means.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: JoJo
"So anyone on campus can get your social security number and check out anything they want to about another member of the "academy."  The End always justifies the means. "

---

The trick is that the professors didn't obtain any "private" information. What they obtained was public information. Dvorak's tenure status in Kentucky is not protected information. In fact, if I recall Dr. Stringer's testimony, he was told her tenure status over the phone without having to produce the offending SSN.

I would call you a dumb ass, JoJo, except that would insult the intelligence of equines everywhere.