Letter to Hattiesburg - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jun 3, 2005

RE: Letter to Hattiesburg

Date: Jun 3, 2005

TW wrote:

This is a familiar pattern. "Visitor" comes to the board, pretends to need enlightenment, refuses to engage in actual dialogue, persists in misinterpreting and misunderstanding reasonable responses, refuses to discuss issues, gets snarky and goes off in a huff only to be reborn under another name.

You got it, Witch!

That said, they give us an opportunity to hone our arguments--there have been some really good posts on this thread, from you and others. By way of preparing for greater interaction with the community, I think we should mine this board and other venues for ready-made analyses of the issues, reduce them to print (as a counter to "Work in Progress"), so that interested community people can study them. I think at the very least we can enhance understanding in the community--how much more we/they can do to sway the powers that be is questionable; but it's certainly worth it to try to win their confidence and support.

Date: Jun 3, 2005

this has gotten circular but interesting discourse, nonetheless.

Date: Jun 3, 2005

Maybe the fourth time will be the charm:

GM,

Would you be willing at least to respond to the excellent points made above by another poster about USM faculty productivity? You, after all, suggested that many USM faculty regard productivity as a four-letter word; the other poster demonstrated (irrefutably, it seemed to me) that USM faculty have in fact been far more productive than faculty at other state universities in MS. So far you haven't responded to his point, even though I've tried to ask -- twice -- as nicely as I know how. If you could at least respond to that point, we might be in a better position to continue the discussion. Thanks.

GM,

I have to admit that I am beginning to think I know why you do not want to respond to this request. You may simply not want to admit that you were wrong in accusing some faculty of considering productivity a dirty word. None of us likes to admit it when we are wrong, but sometimes doing so does help promote an honest dialogue. If there is some other reason that you have not yet addressed my repeated request, I apologize.

Date: Jun 3, 2005

Gracie's Mother wrote:

My visit here is causing me to wonder if we can reach an agreement to try and compromise.

Gracies Mother,

You may tell your King that we do not have the authority to negotiate and reach a compromise. That decision can be made only by the faculty members at all of the major universities across the country. The issues at hand are bigger than the both of us.

Messenger

Date: Jun 3, 2005

Being inspired by USM Sympathizer, I too will repeat my post to Gracie's Mother.

"Please, Gracie's Mother, kindly quote the parts of the post to which you are referring and considered "ridicule, condescending attitudes, or putting a spin on my comments. " If it is from my post, I promise I will not flame your reply, but only try to improve the message I was trying to communicate.

I would welcome a dialogue in which we used no emotional tones, but rather dealt only with facts. Do you think that is possible?"

G.M. now has the choice. Confirm they are a troll or back up assertions with evidence and examples, or apologize and retract their statements as being incorrect.

I will certainly admit my errors if they are pointed out to me. I'm on my knees begging to be educated.

Date: Jun 3, 2005

GM,

Ma'am, can ya please help out my friend, USM Sympathizer? Please, ma'am? He aint askin' for much, ma'am, an' it sure would help settle 'im down a heap. Sure appreciate your help, ma'am. There's a nanner samich in it for ya if ya help him, ma'am. Thankyouverymuch.

Date: Jun 3, 2005

Elvis wrote:

GM, Ma'am, can ya please help out my friend, USM Sympathizer? Please, ma'am? He aint askin' for much, ma'am, an' it sure would help settle 'im down a heap. Sure appreciate your help, ma'am. There's a nanner samich in it for ya if ya help him, ma'am. Thankyouverymuch.

Is that the way we should be talking, Elvis? No wonder we are having trouble communicating.

Thanks.

Date: Jun 3, 2005

Gracie's Mother wrote:

Thank you so much, Dr. Campbell sir, for telling me what I should be doing. Heck, I'm so stupid that I thought it might be a good idea if I tried to establish communication with a few people on this board. I realize I'm just dumb as a rock, but I thought that if we could start talking with each other, we could maybe eventually come together and same a healing process. I appreciate you straightening me out. I now understand that I need to stop this foolishness and instead bow down to the vastly superior AAUP and Faculty Senate. Perhaps I should volunteer to become your slave and wash your feet for you. I have only one nagging question, though. Is it that if there were no further turmoil your image as the brave warrior from out of state would be a harder sale?

GM,

I'm reasonably sure now that you've visited this board under other names, before you started claiming to be somebody's mother.

This isn't Shelby Thames' message board, so no one here is going to ask you to bow down or wash feet.

A bunch of us have asked you to explain the basis for your many opinions about USM and how it functions, but instead of telling us where you got your information or why you believe the things you say believe, you insult us. You can't start a healing process if you won't say what you stand for, and you slam everyone in the vicinity who does stand for something.

It's the people who are subject to the authority of Shelby Thames (and to the authority of his flunkies and his backers) who have been showing courage by speaking out. I'm not subject to SFT's authority, so I make no claim to bravery.

As for further turmoil at USM... I don't need it. My colleagues at USM certainly don't need it. If you're really interested in making sure there is no further turmoil, you need to go to the source. You should respectfully address your request for participation in the healing process to Shelby Thames, Ken Malone, Gregg Lassen, Cynthia Moore, Joan Exline, Toy McLaughlin, Roy Klumb, Tom Colbert, Scott Ross, and Bob Mixon. Good luck.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jun 3, 2005

This stream of posts was generated by a post telling how one person isolated themselves from Hattiesburg by buying elsewhere and avoiding contact with Hattiesburg if he/she could. This is a rational response to a situation where your environment is not what you expected or has changed for the worse. It was hijacked by the poster Gracie's Mother to start a dialogue with other posters on this Board. The thrust of most of these posts is that faculty are not able to communicate their issues with SFT to the Hattiesburg community along with requests to give specific examples of their bad communication skills. While it would be nice to turn back the clock and everyone make nice, it cannot happen. Moreover, it is a waste of time to attempt to convey the seriousness of the problems at USM to people in the community. It is not that they cannot or do not understand what we are saying, it is not important to them. It might be marginally more important if this were happening at Oxford or Starkville, but not all that much. The issues that have been brought up by letter writers would be just as true for Ole Miss or State. If we could replace Khayat with SFT and let him wreck havoc at Ole Miss, most of Hattiesburg's citizens would say the same things about Ole Miss that have been said about USM. Trying to communicate is a useless waste of time. The die is cast and we will see over the next two years what happens. While tempting, it is futile to carry on conversations with posters who make claims that if faculty were more reasonable, things would work out. There is little that faculty can do now but make a futile effort to help SFT get through SACS accreditation. Why a faculty member would want to make such an effort is hard to justify. The faculty, staff, students, and all of Hattiesburg will have front row seats for the impending train wreck. After it is over, maybe some folks will want to talk, but SFT backers will be hard to find.

Date: Jun 3, 2005

Great posts from both RC and Cossack; thanks! I particularly enjoyed RC's foot-washing comment; that probably deserves some kind of award, as does his comment about the real heroes at USM.

In response to Cossack: I have noticed that more and more "anti-faculty" posters on this board now include in their messages a phrase such as this: "I'm no fan of Shelby, but . . . ." I find this fascinating. I doubt that this phrase would have been included a few months ago, but people are now beginning to realize that Shelby is a sinking ship and are beginning to jump overboard. Hardly ANYONE these days now defends Shelby, and certainly not without qualifications being made. Who would have predicted this a year ago? Imagine how much more lame he will seem in a few more months . . . .

Date: Jun 3, 2005

USM Sympathizer wrote:

Great posts from both RC and Cossack; thanks! I particularly enjoyed RC's foot-washing comment; that probably deserves some kind of award, as does his comment about the real heroes at USM. In response to Cossack: I have noticed that more and more "anti-faculty" posters on this board now include in their messages a phrase such as this: "I'm no fan of Shelby, but . . . ." I find this fascinating. I doubt that this phrase would have been included a few months ago, but people are now beginning to realize that Shelby is a sinking ship and are beginning to jump overboard. Hardly ANYONE these days now defends Shelby, and certainly not without qualifications being made. Who would have predicted this a year ago? Imagine how much more lame he will seem in a few more months . . . .

I believe it was Seeker who first started the approach of 1. Not a Shelby supporter, 2. Both sides are wrong, 3. Let's find middle ground, 4. You guys just won't admit you have bad apples also.

Then the newer visitors have added 5. You guys just speek down to and insult everyone 6. No wonder you can't get your message to the public.

I think that about sums up the approaches we have seen recently. What will #7 be?

Date: Jun 3, 2005

LeftASAP wrote:

What will #7 be?

Let's replace him with a more likable incompetent.

Date: Jun 3, 2005

I can't predict what #7 will be, but I'm very confident that somewhere down the line we will be hearing a lot of the following:

"I never liked Shelby to begin with; right from the start I thought he was the wrong man for the job."

And that'll be coming even from Roy Klumb!

Date: Jun 3, 2005

USM Sympathizer wrote:

I can't predict what #7 will be, but I'm very confident that somewhere down the line we will be hearing a lot of the following: "I never liked Shelby to begin with; right from the start I thought he was the wrong man for the job." And that'll be coming even from Roy Klumb!

I never liked Shelby to begin with: right from the start I thought he was the wrong man for the job.

Roy

Date: Jun 3, 2005

Roy, old buddy, old pal! What TOOK you so long?!

Date: Jun 3, 2005

Come on. GM does have a point in some ways. Though this board is a place for us to vent and rage, it does not at all represent faculty sentiment. Just looking at the names and places of posters will give you that. Many posters are no longer here (having given up on their claim of no quarter). Many never were. Many are not in the AAUP (something that GM does not get). Thus for either side to claim to be representative of anything is dead wrong. Thus in the end this board does give a fringe picture of what is up at SFT tech. GM cannot claim that the board represents faculty, and neither can the posters. Sure the vote last year was very much against SFT, but those folks in the main are not posting. Can we have a middle ground? First I do not think that SFT will allow it. However, we should seek a middle ground with community members. I believe that GM posted here out of a need to understand -- and slamming her with questions that many faculty members would not know the answers to or making statements that she is just flat wrong . . . well we are educators and ought to be able to pull off a better result than that. I do like getting support from those who have never been here or from those who have left -- thanks for thinking of us. But in the end this is no longer your problem. It is up to the poor slobs who are still here and are planning on staying (maybe) to do the best we can. I can say no quarter. If you are not here or have left -- well give me a quarter and I will deny it to SFT.

Date: Jun 3, 2005

Rabble wrote:

Come on. GM does have a point in some ways. Though this board is a place for us to vent and rage, it does not at all represent faculty sentiment. Just looking at the names and places of posters will give you that. Many posters are no longer here (having given up on their claim of no quarter). Many never were. Many are not in the AAUP (something that GM does not get). Thus for either side to claim to be representative of anything is dead wrong. Thus in the end this board does give a fringe picture of what is up at SFT tech. GM cannot claim that the board represents faculty, and neither can the posters. Sure the vote last year was very much against SFT, but those folks in the main are not posting. Can we have a middle ground? First I do not think that SFT will allow it. However, we should seek a middle ground with community members. I believe that GM posted here out of a need to understand -- and slamming her with questions that many faculty members would not know the answers to or making statements that she is just flat wrong . . . well we are educators and ought to be able to pull off a better result than that. I do like getting support from those who have never been here or from those who have left -- thanks for thinking of us. But in the end this is no longer your problem. It is up to the poor slobs who are still here and are planning on staying (maybe) to do the best we can. I can say no quarter. If you are not here or have left -- well give me a quarter and I will deny it to SFT.

Rabble,

Thanks for these thoughts. I tried my best to engage in a constructive dialogue with GM, and am still willing to try, but she just would never even attempt to answer the question I posed to her four different times. Once we had been able to get that issue behind us -- the standard and very major claim that USM faculty don't do "a day's work for a day's pay" (i.e., that they are unproductive), we could have moved on to some of her other points, some of which struck me as very much worth discussing.

Do you (and this is an honest question) have any thoughts on how to begin building a middle or common ground with members of the community? Any practical suggestions would really be appreciated.

Date: Jun 4, 2005

LeftASAP wrote:

USM Sympathizer wrote: Great posts from both RC and Cossack; thanks! I particularly enjoyed RC's foot-washing comment; that probably deserves some kind of award, as does his comment about the real heroes at USM. In response to Cossack: I have noticed that more and more "anti-faculty" posters on this board now include in their messages a phrase such as this: "I'm no fan of Shelby, but . . . ." I find this fascinating. I doubt that this phrase would have been included a few months ago, but people are now beginning to realize that Shelby is a sinking ship and are beginning to jump overboard. Hardly ANYONE these days now defends Shelby, and certainly not without qualifications being made. Who would have predicted this a year ago? Imagine how much more lame he will seem in a few more months . . . . I believe it was Seeker who first started the approach of 1. Not a Shelby supporter, 2. Both sides are wrong, 3. Let's find middle ground, 4. You guys just won't admit you have bad apples also. Then the newer visitors have added 5. You guys just speek down to and insult everyone 6. No wonder you can't get your message to the public. I think that about sums up the approaches we have seen recently. What will #7 be?

Well sir, I just got in from having dinner with some friends from the faculty of another university, and I am too tired to answer you. I've been away from my computer, since mid/late afternoon, but I see that you all wasted no time trying, convicting, sentencing, and hanging me. Sorry I missed the trial.

Date: Jun 4, 2005

GM,

Once you're rested, and if you're still interested, I'd be glad to try to engage in a dialogue with you. Just ignore any post you find offensive and respond only to the ones that strike you as substantive.

Date: Jun 4, 2005

Amazing! Did any of you clucks actually read Citizen Gone's post? Did you actually get past your "bring it all down, man!" histrionics? Perhaps, perhaps not. Yet most of you chimed in like the would-be activists you'd like to be.

This man's F-you missive to an entire town rests upon the township's failure to jump onboard with an agenda-driven short bus. I don't know his identity, but I won't miss his trade.

Hattiesburg will get along just fine without your support, Professor Gone. Meanwhile, Dr. Thames will enjoy his remaining time here at USM, having made some awesome accomplishments. Burns, doesn't it?

Date: Jun 4, 2005

USM Sympathizer wrote:

... Do you (and this is an honest question) have any thoughts on how to begin building a middle or common ground with members of the community? Any practical suggestions would really be appreciated.

Be careful Sympathizer, don't go assuming the public is against faculty and we need to find a "middle ground". The trolls in "step 2" try to establish, "both sides are wrong", but never seems to be able to supply evidence. My experience is the public is now on the faculty's side and there is no need to search for "middle ground".

I was in a business the other day and the proprietor asked how it was going. I replied, " I retired from USM--couldn't take mess anymore". His response was, " you too? I must have had ten regular customers in here the last few days that are leaving USM. Are you staying or leaving town? I afraid too many are leaving town".

Date: Jun 4, 2005

Gracie's Mother wrote:

Well sir, I just got in from having dinner with some friends from the faculty of another university, and I am too tired to answer you. I've been away from my computer, since mid/late afternoon, but I see that you all wasted no time trying, convicting, sentencing, and hanging me. Sorry I missed the trial.

G.M., I'm still waiting for a reply to my questions. They should be very easy to answer and only you can answer them. My post was;

"Being inspired by USM Sympathizer, I too will repeat my post to Gracie's Mother.

"Please, Gracie's Mother, kindly quote the parts of the post to which you are referring and considered "ridicule, condescending attitudes, or putting a spin on my comments. " If it is from my post, I promise I will not flame your reply, but only try to improve the message I was trying to communicate.

I would welcome a dialogue in which we used no emotional tones, but rather dealt only with facts. Do you think that is possible?"

G.M. now has the choice. Confirm they are a troll or back up assertions with evidence and examples, or apologize and retract their statements as being incorrect. "

I will certainly admit my errors if they are pointed out to me. I'm on my knees begging to be educated.

Date: Jun 4, 2005

Rabble wrote:

... If you are not here or have left -- well give me a quarter and I will deny it to SFT.

It isn't that kind of quarter, Rabble.

Date: Jun 4, 2005

Citizen Gloat wrote:

Hattiesburg will get along just fine without your support, Professor Gone. Meanwhile, Dr. Thames will enjoy his remaining time here at USM, having made some awesome accomplishments. Burns, doesn't it?

Yep, those sure are "awesome" accomplishments, dude! Fourth tier status; SACS probation; a demoralized faculty; an exodus of some of your very best professors; a national -- and I mean national -- reputation as a totally dysfunctional school; resignation after resignation after resignation of the top cadre of "wurl class" administrators . . . . Nobody could have done it better than Shelby! I know I'm in awe! Hope he enjoys thinking about all this as he drives around in his funny little cart.

Date: Jun 4, 2005

Guess what left? I know exactly what kind of quarter it is (or was). It was an attempt at humor. Must you assume that you know things and others do not? I will give no quarter, by still being here to pick up the pieces when this is all over. To help rebuild USM as a true reflection of what it used to be (if that can be done). It might take a long time as we all know -- but it will be worth the effort. That is in my view the way to "no quarter". How galling to SFT -- he tried to ruin it all, but not to allow that to happen. It involves struggle now, but also careful work in the future. Won't he be miffed to see USM rise from the ashes? Also, lest we forget, many folks outside the university see us as not wanting productivity, not wanting change, etc., etc. etc. Won't that gall SFT to do some of the things that he claimed he was doing along those lines, but to ACTUALLY do them and do them much better with true shared governance? Won't that give many naysayers in the community pause to think? That is the best (though by far hardest) route to take in my opinion. To live beyond the SFT regime. To reclaim USM's lost glory. And even to beat SFT at his very own game and do some of the things that he claims to have accomplished.

Date: Jun 4, 2005

I just wanted to say that many of the old residents of Hattiesburg deplore what Shelby Thames has done to USM and to our community. Many have spoken out but it appears to go much higher than IHL. There appears to be nothing that anyone can do that we have not already tried. Writing to IHL, to our congressman, etc. I always comment to the business people that they are going to be truly sorry when our school closes or becomes a small trade school but they say nothing - most just hang their heads.

Date: Jun 4, 2005

Just wanted to reassure everyone that, contrary to certain rumors, I am still having fun, even though I never wanted to be president. As photographic proof of the fun I am having, I have authorized release of the picture below:

Date: Jun 4, 2005

city resident wrote:

I just wanted to say that many of the old residents of Hattiesburg deplore what Shelby Thames has done to USM and to our community. Many have spoken out but it appears to go much higher than IHL. There appears to be nothing that anyone can do that we have not already tried. Writing to IHL, to our congressman, etc. I always comment to the business people that they are going to be truly sorry when our school closes or becomes a small trade school but they say nothing - most just hang their heads.

Thanks for a great post. If more members of the community simply took the time to post messages like yours, it would do a lot to help morale of the surviving faculty and staff. Please encourage your friends to post. Thanks again.

Date: Jun 4, 2005

Rabble wrote:

Guess what left? I know exactly what kind of quarter it is (or was). It was an attempt at humor. Must you assume that you know things and others do not? ...

Sorry, Rabble, it was too early for me and I missed the humor. I didn't mean to step on toes this early, I usually do that in the afternoon.