Black and White - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: May 15, 2005

RE: RE: Black and White

Date: May 15, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Son of Bubba
"You would have a point if I were trying to defend Thames' actions with that argument, but I'm not. In that context your remark seems to justify my fear."

I'm new to this thread. I rapidly read back though but I can't find what exactly is your fear. Is it that faculty in the classroom is killing USM? You lost me on this point.

Date: May 15, 2005

Son of Bubba, I don't think it's the faculty per se you have a problem with. I think you just plain don't care for the University of Southern Mississippi itself.

Date: May 15, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Get Along Little Bulldoggie
"I think you just plain don't care for the University of Southern Mississippi itself."

Wrong, I think the SoB is an alum...

Date: May 15, 2005

He may be an alum, he's having fun toying with us -- it's a stupid game all these guys play. Gives them a feeling of power like they're pulling people;s strings. If he had a question he'd ask it. No question, just trying to torment people.

Date: May 15, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Uncle Mach
"Wrong, I think the SoB is an alum..."

Don't bet the farm on that, Uncle Mach.

Date: May 15, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Uncle Mach
"Wrong, I think the SoB is an alum..."

There are plenty of alums who don't care about the UNIVERSITY of Southern Mississippi. A fair number have deep-seated inferiority complexes, because their diplomas have "Southern" between "of" and "Mississippi." And an even greater number care only about the win-loss record of their favorite "Southern Miss" team. (The very use of "Southern Miss" suggests the inferiority complex. It's a rather blatant attempt to play off the name "Ole Miss." Sure, the sports fans will argue that "Southern Miss is what ESPN runs on its ticker," but the counter is that ESPN is itself playing off the name recognition of "Ole Miss," which they typically run simply as "Mississippi.")

Whatever. Don't assume that "alumnus" means "gives a rat's a$$ about the UNIVERSITY of Southern Mississippi."

Shelby Thames is an alumnus, for crying out loud. If he cared about anything other than stoking his own inflated ego, he'd realize that almost everything he does seems to make USM look bad & its in-state competitors look good. If he really cared about USM, he'd go ahead & draw his PERS check.

Please, I'm not suggesting that Shelby doesn't "love" USM. Who wouldn't "love" an institution that has tolerated his personal faults & given him such a terrific opportunity for self-aggrandization.

Date: May 15, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Son of Bubba
"I'm really sorry about all that, but I didn't have anything to do with it, and even if it happened to you, it wouldn't justify condemning innocent people just to get even or to win your fight. "

Son of Bubba,

Name one innocent person who is being condemned.

Robert Campbell

Date: May 16, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Son of Bubba
"Thank you, cossack, for you civil and enlightening answer. It seems that there is at least one adult on this message board. Thank you."

Son:
While I clearly agree with you that Cossack provided a "civil and enlightening" answer (see above post in which I nominate his post for Mr. Wonderful's "Citation de la semaine"), I don't understand your beef with Campbell, who was just as civil and enlightening, and argued in pretty much the same vein as Cossack. Can you elucidate? (BTW, I have met Campbell; and believe me, he is very much an adult professional who is doing an immeasurable service for USM, and higher education in Mississippi and the nation.)

Date: May 16, 2005

Some alums come back to USM as faculty.

Date: May 16, 2005

Some alums come back to USM as faculty....

Shelby Thames did. And if this isn't the best example of why we shouldn't hire our own even if their terminal degree is not from here, I don't know what is. Ever heard of inbreeding? Sometime around the early 1970s (72? 73?) after SACS had slammed USM for hiring too many faculty with terminal degrees from USM as well as too many faculty with earned doctorates from LSU, FSU, Alabama, USM made an all out effort to recruit more faculty from outside of those states and outside of the deep south. I know a lot of faculty who were hired for their expertise in various fields. Their terminal degrees were from all over the US. I was one of those faculty members so don't tell me this didn't happen. USM under SFT is returning to the good old days of hire your own. The new Director of the School of Mass Communication and Journalism has a Ph.D. from USM. While he has had experience at a number of univerisites since he graduated, the same faculty he studied under are still at USM. It is very, very rare for prestigious universities to hire alums who have terminal degrees from their institutions.

Date: May 16, 2005

Could some one please make Robert Campbell's long post on this thread a permanent sticky at the top of the board? Or add it to the "read this first" thread? It is a terrific summary.

Date: May 16, 2005

One of your members alluded to "a dying university" in an earlier post in this thread. I happen to believe that the university would be hard to kill, and that it could only be accomplished by assasination in the classroom by the faculty. I DON'T think this is happening. My point, which has been grossly ignored, is that most of you are giving Shelby Thames too much credit and yourselves too little. Most of the faculty are dedicated, hard working professionals who would never let the students down just to win a political struggle.

Another point I am trying to make is that most of the posters on this board are either too paranoid or too defensive to open their minds to questions by someone who is merely trying to understand.

Date: May 16, 2005

I am an Alum who is concered about the ugliness that is going on on my school's campus. I'm trying to determine the villians for I assure you I will jump in the fight with both feet once I'm sure I know where the cancer is located.

At this point it is clear that there is some underhanded dealings going on. I'm not quite clear who the culprits are, but I won't give up until I do.

Date: May 16, 2005

I never asserted that the faculty in the classroom were killing the university. You need to go back and read my message again, and then you might not be so confused, confused.

Date: May 16, 2005

Didn't say that either. I said that "I fear" you will if you keep your aggressive, take no prisoners approach. If you have damaged someone, I don't know it, but I'm not real comfortable with how I've been treated by you all. You're not a very friendly group when you merely suspect someone isn't who they say they are.

You have continued to put words in my mouth and to presume you know what I'm about. That could lead you to erroneous conclusions, unjustified action, and unjustified damage. That bothers me.

Date: May 16, 2005

Please read my most recent messages on these subjects. Thanks for your civil questions.

Date: May 16, 2005

Wrong.

Date: May 16, 2005

SOB:

I'm not "Confused" but I am confused. I'm finding it very difficult to follow your postings on this thread. You seem to be replying to messages that I can't see. Please don't take this wrong, but it kinda sounds like you are talking to yourself. If you would quote the portion of the message you are replying to, we might be able to understand you a bit better.

Date: May 16, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Magnolia
"SOB: If you would quote the portion of the message you are replying to, we might be able to understand you a bit better. "

SOB: If you don't know how to use the "quote" feature, just ask. I am sure somebody will explain.

Date: May 17, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Son of Bubba
"One of your members alluded to "a dying university" in an earlier post in this thread. I happen to believe that the university would be hard to kill, and that it could only be accomplished by assasination in the classroom by the faculty. I DON'T think this is happening. My point, which has been grossly ignored, is that most of you are giving Shelby Thames too much credit and yourselves too little. Most of the faculty are dedicated, hard working professionals who would never let the students down just to win a political struggle.
Another point I am trying to make is that most of the posters on this board are either too paranoid or too defensive to open their minds to questions by someone who is merely trying to understand. "

Son of Bubba,

For reasons other posters have already explained, it's nearly impossible to tell who you are responding to in your various short posts. You never mention whose post, or address any details. As a consequence, other posters to this board can't tell whether you've made any effort to understand what any of us have written.

In my long post above, I tried to show you, in some detail, how a president could kill a university--and how Shelby Thames has been doing just that. Along with all of his other harmful activities, Thames disregarded acccreditation for two and a half years, and then, after getting a shot across the bow in the form of one year of probation from SACS, attempted further actions that threatened USM's ability to get off probation with SACS. Maybe you don't realize that universities that lose their accreditation with SACS either close their doors or are taken over by another institution. Apparently you don't believe a word that I said, but you haven't made any effort to show how my analysis is wrong.

In any event, I think you have completely misunderstood the attitude of the professors at USM.

It is precisely because USM faculty are dedicated, hard-working professionals that so many have already left the university; that many more will leave if Thames is not replaced; and that those who have chosen to stay are fighting Thames and his regime.

If all USM professors had responded to the Thames regime by remaining at USM and carrying out his and his underlings' orders without question, USM would now be less than 3 months from failing to send an adequate report to SACS, and a little over 6 months from being deaccredited for good.

You don't seem to realize that students have already suffered under Thames, because of Thames. (You haven't addressed the detailed example I provided, of how Thames has torn down the Nursing program, whose students are no longer getting adequate preparation to pass their board exams and enter the profession.)

If the faculty do not win this political struggle, USM will be letting its students down in the worst possible way, because the degrees it has issued will at best be devalued and at worst will become worthless. But I can't even tell whether you have registered what faculty members do outside the classroom, because you continue to use the exact same classroom-oriented language that you were employing before several of us responded to you.

Open-mindedness is a two-way obligation. If you are not interested in learning even a little bit about how a university works, you will never be able to sort out who is responsible for the trouble that USM is in today, or the worse trouble it is going to be in if the current administration continues in power.

If some of are us short-tempered these days, it's because the regulars on this board have run into too many posters who don't give a damn about the fate of USM, and don't want to take the time to learn what has gone wrong, but are sure that the professors are up to no good, and have faith in anything that persons in authority (like "Dr. Thames") tell them.

Robert Campbell

Date: May 17, 2005

NO QUARTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Date: May 17, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Emma
"NO QUARTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

emma, you are a gook of the first order

Date: May 17, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Son of Bubba
"I never asserted that the faculty in the classroom were killing the university. You need to go back and read my message again, and then you might not be so confused, confused."

In an earlier post SOB states, "I've met Shelby Thames, and I have my own impressions. I'll keep my opinions to myself, but I'll say that he didn't impress me as powerful enough to run the university down the tubes by himself. I really think he'd have to have a lot of help from the teachers in the classrooms to do that. It seems logical to me that either he is not actually "killing" the university, and if it is dying, it is dying in the classroom where faculty has control of what happens. "

Then later SOB writes, "Can any of you answer my question about how can Shelby Thames kill the university by himself? Can't it only be killed in the classroom? As long as you are doing your jobs in the classrooms don't we have a viable institution?"

Robert, bless him, goes through the trouble of listing many of the ways SFT is killing USM and receives no response from SOB. The earlier posters who welcomed SOB to the board have given up on SOB as a troll. I will wait to see if Robert gets a reasonable response before I continue with this waste of time troll.

Date: May 17, 2005

Robert should save his breath. He'll never get anywhere with this induhvidual.

Date: May 17, 2005

A Failure at Communication?

SOB = Son of Bubba; OP = Other Poster

SOB: Many of you seem ready to challenge anybody who disagrees with your opinions, and you also seem ready to burn anyone who disagrees at the stake sometimes without taking time to get your facts straight. It's only a matter of time before you cause damage to someone who doesn't deserve it.

OP: Welcome to this board. Your posts have been very civil. There is really no need to take sides. In fact, what this board needs is logical, factual representation of the opposition’s arguments. What you experienced last night was frustration from three years of this turmoil and the attacks from trolls. The opposition never presents arguments.

SOB: I've read the messages carefully for which you gave the link, as well as the messages below. I see no acknowledgement of the concerns I expressed in the second paragraph of my message, and little that would qualify as substance. It appears that two groups have chosen up sides and started a game of hate. I suspect that the hate is splattering on some good people in the middle--faculty, administration, and alumni alike.

OP: You just did what I said earlier that supporters of SFT do. …You have said nothing, presented no evidence, facts or issues. You couldn't have read very much if you don't know the long list of issues the faculty have with SFT.

SOB:Well Leaving! You pretty much verify all my fears.

OP: I've yet to see you address a single thing that Shelby Thames has done. Plenty of documentation of his activities is available on this board, or on links from it.

SOB: In your closed mindedness, you have misjudged me by a mile and a half, and you have verified that there are those of you who would cause serious damage to innocent people just to keep a hard line. I was afraid of that, and you have verified my worst fears.

OP: Please, SOB, be specific. Respond with the quote of the post. What innocent people were condemned?

SOB:I'm a perfect example of someone who is trying to approach an ugly situation with an open mind only to be attacked for it by a small minded twerp. You reflect badly on your profession.

OP: I'm new to this thread. I rapidly read back though but I can't find what exactly is your fear.

SOB: I happen to believe that the university would be hard to kill, and that it could only be accomplished by assasination in the classroom by the faculty.

OP: Name one innocent person who is being condemned.

SOB: I said that "I fear" you will if you keep your aggressive, take no prisoners approach. If you have damaged someone, I don't know it, but I'm not real comfortable with how I've been treated by you all. You're not a very friendly group when you merely suspect someone isn't who they say they are.

Date: May 17, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Son of BUbba
"....he didn't impress me as powerful enough to run the university down the tubes by himself . . . . . . . . . . Where am I wrong?

If given the latitude by his governing board, a university president can suddenly remove all the middle management (assistant and associate provosts, deans, associate deans and assistant deans, institutional research staff) who know how the university operates and who are holders of the institutional memory. That leads to constant screw-ups and frustration for those in the trenches (e.g., SACS probation). The other thing a president can do is create an environment in such flagrant violation of standard academic practice and respect for faculty that good people head for the hills. When you lose 35% of the faculty in two years, the damage is immense in some programs (e.g., English, nursing, criminal justice, math, history, education, psychology). Students are the losers when they no longer have access to experienced, talented faculty who have been hired away by other universities. It wouldn't take more than two years to accomplish all of that. An institution taking such a hit would be lucky to recover in ten years.

Date: May 17, 2005

Mother Lode,

You said it all in one paragraph!

Robert Campbell