quote:

---

Originally posted by: Pete
"...... When folks in the community lambast the USM faculty, remember, we're really not significantly different in most ways from the faculty at State and Ole Miss...But, things on those campuses are generally quiet...... BUT, I dare say that if SFT or a president with similar philosophies and ways of operating were to take over, the faculty would cry out similarly.....however, they probably wouldn't have to do so very long, because their alumni and faithful in the community would have given the IHL SO MUCH GRIEF that the individual would have been removed in a heart beat! Ahhhh, but that is STate and Ole Miss.......and that is the IHL.......as quoted by one of their own......SFT was hired to "clean house".........I assure you, what you have seen here at USM would NOT have been tolerated at STate and Ole Miss........... Pete  "

---

Right you are, Pete. South Mississippi is very different from north Mississippi -- far less sophisticated. It's more like the old piney woods of subsistence farmers and outlaws. The USM faculty is the same as that at MS State or Ole Miss, but not the power brokers. Also, the USM student body has always been a rougher lot, for lack of better words. Aubrey Lucas' grand experiment has come to a bitter end. Ironically, if this situation continues, it will be the perpetrators and supporters of this outrage who will lose the most when they discover they have a diploma mill to go with their mediocre sports program. The Ole Miss and State people who allowed the outrage to continue will be the big winners.
 
 
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: North of U.S. 20
" ...South Mississippi is very different from north Mississippi -- far less sophisticated. It's more like the old piney woods of subsistence farmers and outlaws. The USM faculty is the same as that at MS State or Ole Miss, but not the power brokers...."

---

All the more reason that USM faculty -- led by thick-skinned souls like the much-maligned Henry and Young --  should feel damned good about what they've accomplished.  Speak what you will of upstate conspiracies and downtown polarization, the USM faculty took on the tyrant -- and won.

 

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Salesperson
"I'm going to jump into this conversation despite my relatively disheartened state of mind.  I was one of the early proponents of "selling" the anti-Thames position to the lay community in a way that the community would buy it.  I am frustrated because none of the arguments that should have made a difference have been able to cut through the propaganda, small-mindedness, anti-intellectualism, and personal agendas.  I can only now add my voice to the others who know how it is done at higher tier schools in communities and states that care about quality education.  "

---

Thank you.  You concisely voiced why I have already mentally checked out of USM.  The physical relocation will come in due time.  Fortunately, I'm a foreigner so the cost is less.  For the employees more committed to the area, the students, and especially the alumni, I can only imagine the cost.

Respectfully,

quote:

---

Originally posted by: shipmate2
"You concisely voiced why I have already mentally checked out of USM.  The physical relocation will come in due time.  Fortunately, I'm a foreigner so the cost is less.  For the employees more committed to the area, the students, and especially the alumni, I can only imagine the cost."

---

With notable exceptions, the visible alumni have been supporters of the destruction. They will reap what they have sown. That may be the only justice in all of this madness.
 

Fellow Posters -

I have read the comments here with interest and I will have this to post of my own opine. I need to bullet (nobody call the HA) my points, so they won't run together:

- What we've had at USM the past four years has basically been a social experiment conducted by the college board. What we've experienced here with the changes of colleges and cost cutting measures is what the IHL would like to see at of the big three in MS. We (from SFT down) have been used as pawns to see how a university community might act if the IHL decided to make system wide changes.

- Thames is not the problem, he is a symptom of the problem. The problem has always been the lack of respect that Southern Miss has gotten as a whole from the IHL and the state. That's why we lag far behind the other two major Universities in funding per student.

- The faculty I believe was an very important part of the equation, the IHL needed to see if the faculty could do anything to stop what they had in mind. We are not really sure of that answer at this point. If ones main focus in this entire fiasco was the battle the faculty waged against Thames, I am afraid that we missed the bigger picture, the IHL's minipulation of our entire community. We will focus a few minutes on what I feel was the main reason that the faculy never got any traction.

---Community Support. The faculty have to this point not been able to gain much support from outside of academia. I feel the main reason for this is two fold. 1) Messager 2) Dilevery. I am going to step on some toes here, and will probably be called some terrible names, but you guys deserve to hear the truth, so here it comes.

Messager - When the faculty first came out against Thames the charge was led some of the most radical, unlikeable and arrogant members of the Southern Miss faculty. I understand that he's a hero to most everyone on this board, but how many of you can look in your heart and say that you actually liked Noel Polk? I have a great deal of respect for Bill Scarobrough, but many are put off by what could be construed as a classic case of academic elitism. People who know him seem to like him very much, myself included, but he didn't come across as very endeering on TV or in news print. Then came the letters in the American, they did a great deal to turn public opinion against the faculty.

Message - You will never win support by telling those you are trying to get to support you how stupid they are. This is where I first became concerned that the faculty would eventually find themselves in this situation.

-Another thing that the faculty has done and is continuing to do - picking the wrong battles to fight. The realy enemy has always been the IHL, but Thames will do because he's the face of them on campus, but many have decided to declare war on athletics, the athletic boosters, business community, Toy McLaughlin, EagleTalk, and even Bower himeslf (after the Raines news). Doing so is like fighting a two front way in Europe or a land war in Asia. Sooner or later you are going to ware down to nothing. And if a victory is to be had it is Pyrrhic at best.

So ends my rant.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: LeftASAP
"
Thanks for your opinion, Seeker.  I can see now why we had so much trouble communicating.  We are talking pass each other. We were discussing a battle of principles.  I read your opinion and you never once mentioned any principle involved in this battle.  It never was the changes brought by SFT, but how he brought them without shared governance.
You mentioned people and whether we liked them or not.  You didn't consider the principles or the issues the people were supporting.  The disagreements with the boosters, business community, Toy McLaughlin etc. all involved different principles and issues, all of which you ignored.    
Your approach is to make it all style, taste and opinion without principles so it is completely subjective.   No wonder you would say, "both sides are at fault" and "meet in the middle ground".   I see no way to communicate with someone who denies the existence of the professional issues and considers it only a political spat. 
Can you imagine this occurring with doctors at a hospital?  Do you think the public would fell competent to give an opinion in that situation?  Why do th
ey give opinions with a university?"

---

I hate to be the one to break this too you, but in this situation your princples mean nothing. That is why they were not addressed. If you would like me to address them, they were played as a pawn just as you and I have been played as pawns.

We can talk about your principles all day long, but maybe the reason that I didn't mention them and nobody else is giving them a second thought is because your leadership was either unwilling or unable to communicate them to the public.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Seeker
" I hate to be the one to break this too you, but in this situation your princples mean nothing."

---

Well, Seeker, with statement you have not only lost the battle (metaphor), you have lost the war (metaphor). Bye.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: LeftASAP
"
Are you saying you never hear of "shared governance"?  This has been discussed over and over on the board and in the media.  Check the Faculty Senate web site for the list of violations presented to the IHL.  What in the world did you think the faculty's problem with SFT was?
You say, "I hate to be the one to break this too you, but in this situation your principles mean nothing."   Mean nothing to whom?  It is the whole issue for the faculty. It is at the core of why USM will have problems with SACS.  Do you mean it means nothing to the public who don't understand academics?  I agree, and that is why SFT brought the fight to the public because he could confuse them.  These issues are difficult to explain to lay people.
You say, "they were played as a pawn just as you and I have been played as pawns." Is this code language?  How were the "principles of academia" played "as pawns"?  What does it even mean?
You say,” nobody else is giving them a second thought is because your leadership was either unwilling or unable to communicate them to the public."  SACS is paying attention to them.  They were communicated clearly to the IHL via the commissioner.  Only SFT's side is either ignorant of them or ignores them which produces the problem.
Seeker, you expressed you opinions, but only back it up with more opinions.  Please tell us how you think the faculty could communicate the principles of academia to the public?  And why?
The public has no need to know of these principles that Klumb calls "technical".  The IHL board has a staff to help them with it all.  Only in H'burg, MS !!!   Why only here?  What is the underlying hatred going on here? 
 
 "

---

I honestly don't know if I can make this any clearer, but I will try.

Left,

We have all be played as pawns by th IHL. They conducted a social experiment at USM, to impliment cost cutting measures. They wanted to see if it would work, before trying it at one of the two schools in the state that they care about. Thames was just as much of a pawn as the rest of more so in fact, because he was used as the X varible. Whoever posted above that the faculty at USM are the same as those others in the state, that's correct. Thames is the varible in this situation. Who placed Thames here? The IHL, why did they place him here, to see if their plan of University reorginazion would work. I think they were suprised by their X-Factor as well. Although I believe that he is carrying out their orders, I think that the methods that he has used, is the only thing that the IHL have disagreed with.

The IHL cares less about your shared governace principle than dose joe public. Sadly, we all played the game out just as they had hoped.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Seeker
" I honestly don't know if I can make this any clearer, but I will try. Left, We have all be played as pawns by th IHL. They conducted a social experiment at USM, to impliment cost cutting measures. They wanted to see if it would work, before trying it at one of the two schools in the state that they care about. Thames was just as much of a pawn as the rest of more so in fact, because he was used as the X varible. Whoever posted above that the faculty at USM are the same as those others in the state, that's correct. Thames is the varible in this situation. Who placed Thames here? The IHL, why did they place him here, to see if their plan of University reorginazion would work. I think they were suprised by their X-Factor as well. Although I believe that he is carrying out their orders, I think that the methods that he has used, is the only thing that the IHL have disagreed with. The IHL cares less about your shared governace principle than dose joe public. Sadly, we all played the game out just as they had hoped."

---

No we did not play along. All hell broke loose. The inflated enrollment was revealed. The suspect credentials of a vice president were exposed. SACS probation was handed down. Over 200 faculty members bailed out, and the president did not get reappointed. The USM faculty, Faculty Senate, and AAUP resisted the depredations thrust upon them because they were prepared to defend the principles of academic integrity. If the IHL had understood higher education, they could have predicted the outcome of putting a Philistine in charge. Of course, they never thought that USM was a university.
 

Thanks, Seeker, for your efforts to communicate.

If I may just add one item to the list of why the faculty don't seem to be respected, it's a kind of temptation that we are all prone to, being fallen human beings and all.  It's the temptation to get something for nothing.  If people with Ph.D.'s are respected for their intelligence (or whatever), and you can demonstrate that you know more than those silly professors, then you are smart without any effort.  It's harder to do that with medicine, so people don't go there.

I'm not sure if I'm making any sense with this.  Maybe someone else can rephrase it.  I'm not up late but rather early, as I'm in England for two months researching.  Please don't envy me--I'm on a very short leash with a very long list of things to do.

Jameela

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Seeker
"
Seeker:
To answer bullets with bullets (metaphoric--no, typographic):

What we've experienced here with the changes of colleges and cost cutting measures is what the IHL would like to see at of the big three in MS.
•Maybe so, but it has been repeatedly pointed out on this board that the "cost cutting" has largely been a dismal failure--more money has been wasted than "saved." I don't think that the mushrooming cost of endless searches and the attendant consumption of faculty time/attention has been sufficiently stressed. Especially when you consider that many (most?) of the new hires will immediately start looking for another job, a substantially increased budget for searches will have to be added. (Unless, of course, we, as a cost-cutting measure, dispense with searches.)

- Thames is not the problem, he is a symptom of the problem. The problem has always been the lack of respect that Southern Miss has gotten as a whole from the IHL and the state.
•I think the faculty is completely aware of this. However, I think Thames stunned IHL by creating way more problems than they had in mind.

If ones main focus in this entire fiasco was the battle the faculty waged against Thames, I am afraid that we missed the bigger picture, the IHL's minipulation of our entire community.
•As I said above, I don't think anybody at USM missed the bigger picture (actually, I'm convinced there is a WAY bigger picture, but let's not go there right now). The faculty's strategy was to focus on every aspect of the dreadful choice IHL had made for president and thereby place into question their competence/motivation. I agree with you that many in the community have not (yet) woken up to the facts on this.

Messager - When the faculty first came out against Thames the charge was led some of the most radical, unlikeable and arrogant members of the Southern Miss faculty.
•Matter of opinion, but largely irrelevant. Especially in the business/professional community, one expects to find cool heads who can understand the issues and ignore the personalities--they have to do it in other contexts every day.

-Another thing that the faculty has done and is continuing to do - picking the wrong battles to fight. The realy enemy has always been the IHL, but Thames will do because he's the face of them on campus,
•I think you underestimate how much impact this struggle has had on IHL (witness closed-door meetings, shouting, no full second term, etc.). Since the faculty has no direct access to IHL, fighting Thames was the best strategy to get to them. And don't forget SACS, national AAUP (we're not done with them yet), and the devasting impact all this has had on the image of USM, IHL, and the state of Mississippi nationwide. Community leaders have had as much opportunity as anybody else to watch the development of all this. In my opinion, they should have approached the faculty directly in an effort to work out a strategy to work out common objectives; but to my knowledge, they have elected to either sit by and watch or to actively oppose the faculty.

but many have decided to declare war on athletics, the athletic boosters, business community, Toy McLaughlin, EagleTalk, and even Bower himeslf (after the Raines news).
•Uh, who declared war on whom? Seems to me the athletic supporters had a great deal to do with getting Shelby appointed. As for comments on this board, as has been reiterated many times, anybody can post. I know for certain that the Faculty Senate and the AAUP are focused entirely on the impact of SFT/IHL on academics and academic freedom.

Doing so is like fighting a two front way in Europe or a land war in Asia. Sooner or later you are going to ware down to nothing. And if a victory is to be had it is Pyrrhic at best.

•You've got a point here. As you well know, Shelby has a full-time staff and a substantial budget available to him to assist him in running a relentless propaganda campaign. Professors, on the other hand, are supposed to be teaching and researching, not re-fighting ancient battles. It is a real tribute to their commitment to principle that so many professors have stood up to the tyranny of SFT and IHL, and defended themselves against the misguided attacks from the community. In the final analysis, however, the faculty wins. They can take their experience and talent to a place where they are understood and appreciated--and where, in addition to teaching, research, and service, fighting culture wars is not part of the job description.

."

---

Since this thread has really gone far off topic, I started the thread "A dialog with Seeker" to continue the discussions. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Notice how Seeker has been speaking up, and Son of Bubba had disappeared again? Robert Campbell"

---

Are you suggesting that Seeker and Son of Bubba may be one in the same? Hmmm.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Rudy Kazootie
"Seeker has typically had the guts to respond and s/he actually engages in dialog much of the time. Son of Bubba justs hits and runs. "

---

Their style is different. Their grammar is different. Their typing is different. Their timing is different. Their ages seem to be different. Seeker does give an indication that he is lost and is trying to find it. S.O.B. acts as if he has already found it - and maybe, like Dan Q., even invented it.